Thu Jan 25 12:06:39 PST 2007
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Error while creating second set
- Next message: [Slony1-general] PATCH: more explicitly recommend primary keys
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hello, The attached patch updates the docs about defining keys. It more explicitly recommends using a primary key, and provides an example syntax to convert a unique/not null index to a primary key. The essence of the patch has been text-ified below for easier peer review of grammar and accuracy. Mark .... If the table hasn't got a primary key, but has some <em>candidate</em> primary key, that is, some index on a combination of fields that is both UNIQUE and NOT NULL, then you can specify the key, as in the example below. SET ADD TABLE (set id = 1, origin = 1, id = 42, full qualified name = 'public.this_table', key = 'this_by_that', comment='this_table has this_by_that as a candidate primary key'); HOWEVER, once you have gotten this far, there is little reason not to just convert the index to be a primary key instead, which also implies that the columns involved be NOT NULL, and will create a unique index. Here's an example conversion: DROP INDEX my_table_name_col1_col2_uniq_idx; ALTER TABLE my_table_name ADD PRIMARY KEY (col1, col2); If your application is not using the index by name, the effective result should be the same, with the added value that a primary key has been declared. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: definesets.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1461 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://gborg.postgresql.org/pipermail/slony1-general/attachments/20070125/f037d55b/attachment.bin
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Error while creating second set
- Next message: [Slony1-general] PATCH: more explicitly recommend primary keys
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list