X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86F0A329EA5 for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:18:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57878-03 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:18:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from web50002.mail.yahoo.com (web50002.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.38.17]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DE6F329DD0 for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:18:52 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <20040920231852.9042.qmail@web50002.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [69.65.137.210] by web50002.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:18:52 CDT Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:18:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Jaime Casanova Subject: Re: unique constraints on foreign keys To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20040920135913.H79243@megazone.bigpanda.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200409/179 X-Sequence-Number: 14882 --- Stephan Szabo escribió: > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Jaime Casanova wrote: > > > There is a way to not enforce the creation of a > > primary or unique index on a referenced table? > > Not really. It's not the index that's important > per-se, it's the uniqueness that is implied. OK. What about to teach the planner always do a seq on that table and do not ask for use the index? but not using "set" instructions. can i do that? _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias. Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com