On 2013-10-15 11:55:06 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Also, because you can't INDEX CONCURRENTLY a PK, I've been building a > lot of databases which have no PKs, only UNIQUE indexes.
You know that you can add prebuilt primary keys using ALTER TABLE ... ADD CONSTRAINT ... PRIMARY KEY (...) USING indexname? > Postgres doesn't distinguish between UNIQUE indexes > and PRIMARY KEYs -- as, indeed, it shouldn't, since they're both keys, > adn the whole concept of a "primary key" is a legacy of index-organized > databases, which PostgreSQL is not. There's some other differences, fro one primary keys are automatically picked up by foreign keys if the referenced columns aren't specified, for another we do not yet automatically recognize NOT NULL UNIQUE columns in GROUP BY. > However, it does seem like the new syntax could be extended with and > optional "USING unqiue_index_name" in the future (9.5), no? Yes. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
