2009/8/21 Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com>: > If they include indexes and not constraints, I think we should follow > the same policy as unique constraints, and create the index and the > constraint. > > The behavior seems a little strange to me, but that's the current > behavior for unique indexes.
This may be an opportunity to fix it. The current behaviour seems to be predicated on the unique constraint being an integral part of the index itself. While this might be true from a system catalog point of view (pg_index.indisunique), if a user says that they want to copy a table's structure INCLUDING INDEXES EXCLUDING CONSTRAINTS then IMO they've made their intention perfectly clear. They'd expect it to create an index sans the unique constraint. Ignoring the user's intention and copying the index as-is (including the unique constraint) would be unfriendly. Unless the SQL spec demands that we do so? Cheers, BJ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
