Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>    I also haven't checked the constraint name. To do so it would make sense to
>    use a small hash table.

No, it'd make sense to use strcmp().  It's unlikely that there will be
enough constraints attached to any one table to justify use of any but
the simplest algorithm.  AFAICS you should just iterate through the
child constraints looking for matches ... and I'd suggest checking the
name first, as that will save a whole lot more work in reverse-compiling
than any amount of tenseness in the matching code.

>    I'm ignoring unique, primary key, and foreign key constraints on the theory
>    that these things don't really work on inherited tables yet
>    anyways.

Yeah, the consistent thing to do with these is nothing, until something
is done about the generic problem.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to