On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck <JanWieck@yahoo.com> writes:
> > IMHO there's nothing fundamentally wrong with having pg_dump
> > dumping the constraints as special triggers, because they are
> > implemented in PostgreSQL as triggers. ...
> > The advantage of having pg_dump output these constraints as
> > proper ALTER TABLE commands would only be readability and
> > easier portability (from PG to another RDBMS).
>
> More to the point, it would allow easier porting to future Postgres
> releases that might implement constraints differently. So I agree with
> Philip that it's important to have these constructs dumped symbolically
> wherever possible.
>
> However, if that's not likely to happen right away, I think a quick hack
> to restore tgconstrrelid in the context of the existing approach would
> be a good idea.
A while ago, I wrote up a small tutorial example about using RI
w/Postgres. There wasn't much response to a RFC, but it might be helpful
for people trying to learn what's in pg_trigger. It includes a discussion
about how to disable RI, change an action, etc.
It's at
http://www.ca.postgresql.org/mhonarc/pgsql-docs/archive/pgsql-docs.200012
--
Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org>
Director of Information Systems, Support Center of Washington
