2012/12/30 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>:
> * Pavel Stehule (pavel.stehule@gmail.com) wrote:
>> so - cannot be a solution define CONSTRAINT_TABLE field - constaint
>> names in table are unique.
>
> Adding a table column, and a schema column, would be ideal. Those would
> all be part of the PK and not null'able, but then we wouldn't
> necessairly always return all that information- that's the situation
> that we've been talking about.
>
>> sure there is a problem with long names, but I am thinking so it has
>> solution - when constraint has no name, then we can try to generate
>> name, and when this name is longer than 63 chars, then CREATE
>> STATEMENT fails and users should be define name manually - this
>> feature should be disabled by guc due compatibility issues.
>
> CREATE doesn't fail if the name is too long today, it truncates it
> instead. I continue to feel that's also the wrong thing to do.
probably it is far to ideal - but I have not any feedback about
related problems in production.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
