Re: Retail DDL

On 2025-08-18 Mo 10:39 AM, Isaac Morland wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 at 10:32, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
> > But the real issue is what to print.  In the case of a table, should
> > we also show its indexes?  What about foreign keys to or from other
> > tables?  If it's a partitioned table, what about the partitions?
> > I'm not sure this is as simple as it seems.
>
> Agreed it's not simple, but that doesn't mean we should not do it.
> Tables are the most obviously complex case. I'm inclined to say
> foreign
> keys to but not from, and also include indexes. But maybe we can
> provide
> several flavors, by allowing some function options, e.g.
>
>
> Are you sure you don't mean from but not to?
>
> If I want foreign keys from a table when looking at that table's
> definition, they can be part of a single CREATE TABLE statement. If I
> want foreign keys to that table, I need a bunch of ALTER TABLE
> statements naming the other tables whose foreign keys point at the
> table in question.

Sorry. I mean FK constraints on the table in question. I guess that's
"from but not to", yes.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com