| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| Date: | 2002-03-11 01:33:43 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0203102031360.684-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Tom Lane writes:
> The SQL spec is not a great deal of help on this, since it doesn't
> have rules or triggers at all.
The SQL spec has triggers, and their names are supposed to be
globally unique.
> For constraints, it requires database-wide uniqueness of constraint
> names --- a rule I doubt anyone is going to favor adopting for
> Postgres.
This should probably be schema-wide, which poses much less of a problem.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-03-11 01:37:43 | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-03-11 01:12:40 | Re: numeric/decimal docs bug? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-03-11 01:37:43 | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| Previous Message | msn | 2002-03-10 22:19:34 | Referential integrity implementation - bug or user error? |