>1. INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS does not bring over the Foreign Keys
>Not a bug since the documentation states that the only additional constraints that are brought over are check constraints. Not Null constraints are always brought >over.
Hmmm, The document would be a lot clearly if it simply stated Foreign Keys are NOT brought over.
Anyhow, I've found a work around for that,
>2. INCLUDING ALL does not work and generates an ERROR;
>For kicks does writing it out in long form work?
No. I tried INCLUDING ALL and just ALL by itself, both create a syntax error.
{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { DEFAULTS | CONSTRAINTS | INDEXES | STORAGE | COMMENTS | ALL }
1. INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS does not bring over the Foreign Keys
Not a bug since the documentation states that the only additional constraints that are brought over are check constraints. Not Null constraints are always brought over.
"""
Not-null constraints are always copied to the new table. CHECK constraints will only be copied if INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS is specified; other types of constraints will never be copied. Also, no distinction is made between column constraints and table constraints — when constraints are requested, all check constraints are copied.
"""
2. INCLUDING ALL does not work and generates an ERROR;
For kicks does writing it out in long form work?
"""
INCLUDING ALL is an abbreviated form of INCLUDING DEFAULTS INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS INCLUDING INDEXES INCLUDING STORAGE INCLUDING COMMENTS.
"""
David J.
--
Melvin Davidson I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.