On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> What seems like a saner answer to me is to change the backend so that it
> will accept these ALTER commands in either order, with the same end state.
> The reason it throws an error now, IMO, is just so that blindly issuing
> the same ALTER ADD CONSTRAINT twice will fail. But we could deal with
> that by saying that it's okay as long as the initially-targeted constraint
> doesn't already have conislocal = true.
+1. Been bitten by this one myself.