2012/12/30 Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net>: > * Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> so - cannot be a solution define CONSTRAINT_TABLE field - constaint >> names in table are unique. > > Adding a table column, and a schema column, would be ideal. Those would > all be part of the PK and not null'able, but then we wouldn't > necessairly always return all that information- that's the situation > that we've been talking about. > >> sure there is a problem with long names, but I am thinking so it has >> solution - when constraint has no name, then we can try to generate >> name, and when this name is longer than 63 chars, then CREATE >> STATEMENT fails and users should be define name manually - this >> feature should be disabled by guc due compatibility issues. > > CREATE doesn't fail if the name is too long today, it truncates it > instead. I continue to feel that's also the wrong thing to do.
probably it is far to ideal - but I have not any feedback about related problems in production. Regards Pavel Stehule > > Thanks, > > Stephen -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
