Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index
Date
Msg-id 4CF94D31.4000607@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 03.12.2010 21:58, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of vie dic 03 16:45:59 -0300 2010:
>
>> ALTER TABLE table_name SET PRIMARY KEY USING INDEX index_name. Quite
>> verbose, but imho USING makes it much more clear that it's an existing
>> index.
>
> I was going to post the same thing (well except I was still thinking in
> ADD PRIMARY KEY rather than SET PRIMARY KEY).  I think SET is better
> than ADD in that it is a bit different from the syntax that makes it
> create a new index.  On the other hand, it could also be pointlessly
> annoying.

I think I'd prefer ADD too. I didn't pay attention to that when I posted.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: r t
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert default wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux 2.6.33+