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

From Gurjeet Singh
Subject Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index
Date
Msg-id AANLkTik8ra-2N9ftS=J3ZYkV5uhjBuk8Uko=7ou-eiPG@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
In the end I think this is mainly an issue of setting appropriate
expectations in the documentation.  I've added the following text to
the ALTER TABLE manual page:

    <para>
     After this command is executed, the index is <quote>owned</> by the
     constraint, in the same way as if the index had been built by
     a regular <literal>ADD PRIMARY KEY</> or <literal>ADD UNIQUE</>
     command.  In particular, dropping the constraint will make the index
     disappear too.
    </para>

I'd change that last sentence to:

... dropping the constraint will drop the index too.

'disappear' doesn't seem accurate in the context.

Regards,
--
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.EnterpriseDB.com

singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet

Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: SSI patch version 14