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.
