Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key
Date: 2008-05-10 15:55:29
Message-ID: 2714.1210434929@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> As a counter point, I don't see any reason to make the DBA's life
> harder. Sure it is just one step but it is a human step, prone to error
> and taking more time than it should. Why not just make it easy?

I don't see that decorating infrequently-used statements with bizarre
options that duplicate the functionality of other commands is "making it
easy". Apparently your definition of "easy" depends entirely on
keystrokes and not at all on memory/cognitive burden.

IMHO a utility command should do one easily-explained thing. The fewer
options the better.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-05-10 16:22:54 Re: constraint exclusion analysis caching
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-05-10 15:55:17 Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key