Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 11:47 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> That sounds like the constraint is based on an existing index, but there
>> can't be any existing indexes on a table that hasn't been created yet.
>> If this creates the index, then the syntax needs to support specifying
>> index access method and an opclass for all the columns.
>
> Of course, thanks for pointing that out. To make it work at CREATE TABLE
> time, the language would have to specify the index access method, and
> the index name should be optional. Do you think it's worthwhile adjust
> the syntax for that, or would it just bloat the CREATE TABLE syntax for
> no reason?
>
> I'm leaning toward not allowing it at CREATE TABLE time.
Seems reasonable to me too.
> However, I'm not sure if it's very easy to provide support for
> concurrent index building. Should I block it, or is it worth
> investigating further?
Dunno. It sure would be nice, but it's not a showstopper.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
