Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C516326B5
	for <pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:54:04 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 38357-08 for
	<pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 18 Aug 2010 20:53:57 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 43E7F6327D4
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:53:57 -0300 (ADT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2010 20:53:55 -0000
Received: from a88-115-218-165.elisa-laajakaista.fi (EHLO [10.0.0.101])
	[88.115.218.165]
	by mail.gmx.net (mp070) with SMTP; 18 Aug 2010 22:53:55 +0200
X-Authenticated: #495269
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18T3bF73gkTDUochVCpqCfjorxsPww0MI2pEjanvR
	OXBOygCuWRKbXu
Subject: Re: Primary Key index
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=zsckLwmTuXDpcyu7SHxgJDwC6FWkHcQVR4sOK@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=zsckLwmTuXDpcyu7SHxgJDwC6FWkHcQVR4sOK@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 23:53:53 +0300
Message-ID: <1282164833.27661.5.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201008/58
X-Sequence-Number: 5882

On ons, 2010-08-18 at 16:52 +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> In response to a user asking a question about indexes on primary keys
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2010-08/msg00194.php)
> I attach a patch to add information to the Primary Keys section of the
> Constraints page.  While the information already exists on the CREATE
> TABLE, I don't think a brief mention on the page specifically
> concerning primary keys could hurt.
> 
> So here's a patch to add it.  Worth adding?

<firstterm> is probably not appropriate here, because you are not
defining the term for the first time.