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