From: John Scalia <jayknowsunix@gmail.com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: More on my partitioning problem
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:38:39 -0500
Message-ID: <F3E3A375-CF42-4EFD-8C89-151953481360@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <afa308100d47d0f9003225a8d39eae82786a7f1d.camel@cybertec.at>
References: <afa308100d47d0f9003225a8d39eae82786a7f1d.camel@cybertec.at>
Thank, Laurenz ( again ) don’t know why I didn’t think of that. 😎
Sent from my iPad
> On Nov 2, 2020, at 9:34 AM, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 07:40 -0500, John Scalia wrote:
>> I created a UNIQUE INDEX on the new base table using the original primary key
>> and the partitioning key. So far, so good. But doing an ALTER TABLE ADD PRIMARY KEY USING INDEX,
>> is not supported. So. being that I already have a unique index here, does it
>> really matter if I do not declare a primary key here? Otherwise, how would I go
>> about creating a primary key on this partitioned table?
>
> Don't create a unique index and then use it to define a primary key constraint,
> create the primary key directly:
>
> ALTER TABLE part ADD PRIMARY KEY (id, part_key);
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz
> --
> Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: jayknowsunix@gmail.com, laurenz.albe@cybertec.at
Subject: Re: More on my partitioning problem
In-Reply-To: <F3E3A375-CF42-4EFD-8C89-151953481360@gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox