Re: RI Constraint display - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: RI Constraint display
Date
Msg-id 27408.1041309618@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RI Constraint display  (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>)
Responses Re: RI Constraint display  (elein <elein@sbcglobal.net>)
List pgsql-general
Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, elein wrote:
>> Almost all of the system generated names, sequences, triggers, etc,
>> have constructed names.  $n for constrain names seems like an anomaly.

> I think it's been that way for check constraints for a long time unless I
> remember incorrectly.

I think you remember correctly.

The "$n" convention is somewhat arbitrary, but in my mind it certainly
beats the OID-based convention we have used for RI triggers.  For one
thing, if you issue the same table declaration twice, you'll get the
same names associated with unnamed constraints...

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: RI Constraint display
Next
From: Garo Hussenjian
Date:
Subject: Dump / restore question