Re: Dump/Restore of non-default PKs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dump/Restore of non-default PKs
Date: 2022-04-18 20:48:07
Message-ID: 2379840.1650314887@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 1:00 PM Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
> wrote:
>> I propose that we change pg_dump so that when it creates a PK it does
>> so in 2 commands:
>> 1. CREATE [UNIQUE] INDEX iname ...
>> 2. ALTER TABLE .. ADD PRIMARY KEY USING INDEX iname;

> Why not just get rid of the limitation that constraint definitions don't
> support non-default methods?

That approach would be doubling down on the assumption that we can always
shoehorn more custom options into SQL-standard constraint clauses, and
we'll never fall foul of shift/reduce problems or future spec additions.
I think for example that USING INDEX TABLESPACE is a blot on humanity,
and I'd be very glad to see pg_dump stop using it in favor of doing
things as Simon suggests.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2022-04-18 20:53:53 Re: avoid multiple hard links to same WAL file after a crash
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-04-18 20:44:03 Re: using an end-of-recovery record in all cases