if PG accepts un-named constraints, a solution would be to not name
the constraints.

I had to make a similar fix for DB2 FK's due to FK name length limits.

Russell

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Courcoux [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 7:39 AM
> To: Turbine Torque Developers List
> Subject: Unique column constraints
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> As there is a lot of work going on with torque just now, I 
> would like to
> repost the following message posted 1st September. 
> 
> I haven't got to grips with scarab yet and have not had time to delve
> into the code properly.
> 
> I hope this helps.
> 
>     I just found that with 2 unique constraints in a relation,
>     torque-3-b4-dev generates indeces with the same name for 
> postgresql.
>     I have temporarily worked round this by adding the unique column
>     name to the index name as follows. This works for my application (
>     two single column constraints) but I don't think this is a good
>     solution. I have not yet found my way through the code to work out
>     what was intended.
>     
>     base/postgresql/unique.vm
>     
>     #foreach ($unique in $table.Unices)
>         CONSTRAINT ${unique.Name}${unique.ColumnList} UNIQUE
>     ($unique.ColumnList),
>     #end
>     
> Regards,
> 
> Peter Courcoux
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to