From: | wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) |
---|---|
To: | maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian) |
Cc: | Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: System indexes are never unique indexes( was RE: [HACKERS] mdnblocksis |
Date: | 1999-10-26 08:11:46 |
Message-ID: | m11g1hq-0003kLC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > >
> > > > As I was afraid,2 tables of a same name could be made.
> > > > After a short investigating,I found that system indexes are
> > > > never unique indexes.
> > > > Why ?
> > > > Without duplicate index check,it's very difficult to prevent
> > > > objects from having same name.
> > >
> > > They certainly should be unique.
> > >
> >
> > All should be unique ?
> > I don't know system indexes well.
>
> Not sure. I don't remember which ones. I can take a look when I add
> more indexes for 7.0.
Don't remember if really or what, but wasn't there some
problem with cached system relations, unique indices and
concurrency?
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#========================================= wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-10-26 09:06:35 | Re: [HACKERS] Function-manager redesign: second draft (long) |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 1999-10-26 07:27:55 | Re: [ADMIN] Re: [HACKERS] RFC: Industrial-strength logging (longmessage) |