| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bryn Llewellyn <bryn(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, pgsql-general list <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two questions about "pg_constraint" |
| Date: | 2022-08-27 02:19:07 |
| Message-ID: | 2159876.1661566747@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bryn Llewellyn <bryn(at)yugabyte(dot)com> writes:
> My other question was about the "connamespace" column. It seemed to me,
> both at first and still now, that this is a clear instance of a
> transitive dependency.
I think a more productive way to think about it is that it's
denormalization for efficiency; specifically to let constraints
be looked up by name+namespace without having to get other
catalogs involved. (SET CONSTRAINTS is one thing that requires
that, and I think there are others.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bryn Llewellyn | 2022-08-27 17:57:55 | Re: Two questions about "pg_constraint" |
| Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2022-08-27 02:02:54 | Re: Two questions about "pg_constraint" |