Re: Clarification to catalog-pg-class

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Clarification to catalog-pg-class
Date: 2009-02-07 19:04:50
Message-ID: 498DDB52.6070207@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Bruce,

>> Currently, catalog-pg-class is a bit confusing as to where FKs are
>> tracked in pg_class. Please update the lines for relchecks and
>> reltriggers to read:
>>
>> relchecks int2 Number of check constraints on the table (but not
>> other types of constraints); see pg_constraint catalog
>
> Uh, why do we have to say "but" when we clearly say "check constraints"?
> Do we need to say "CHECK" contraints?

Because I've encountered two people on IRC (and a client) who were
confused about this, and it confused me briefly when I fielded their
questions. Saying "CHECK constraints" would also probably do it, or
saying "check constraints (only)"

BTW, why do we still have relukeys etc. around? If we haven't used them
in 5 versions, shouldn't we purge them?

>
>> reltriggers int2 Number of triggers on the table, including
>> constraint-triggers for foreign keys; see pg_trigger catalog
>
> pg_class doesn't have that column anymore, it has relhastriggers.

Ah. Where are we tracking FKs at this point, then?

--Josh

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-02-07 19:29:29 Re: Clarification to catalog-pg-class
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2009-02-07 17:05:33 Re: Clarification to catalog-pg-class