public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Cc: Simon Riggs <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Dump/Restore of non-default PKs
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:48:07 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwbZcudqgSCwM4rKoOfs1AbjN3ssPXv6yqmABGitk2CBwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANbhV-GdnAc-fpUvtkwJ5+YGoKYVOmTUQp9k1A4ODo=bdJ-Oww@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKFQuwbZcudqgSCwM4rKoOfs1AbjN3ssPXv6yqmABGitk2CBwg@mail.gmail.com>
"David G. Johnston" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 1:00 PM Simon Riggs <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> I propose that we change pg_dump so that when it creates a PK it does
>> so in 2 commands:
>> 1. CREATE [UNIQUE] INDEX iname ...
>> 2. ALTER TABLE .. ADD PRIMARY KEY USING INDEX iname;
> Why not just get rid of the limitation that constraint definitions don't
> support non-default methods?
That approach would be doubling down on the assumption that we can always
shoehorn more custom options into SQL-standard constraint clauses, and
we'll never fall foul of shift/reduce problems or future spec additions.
I think for example that USING INDEX TABLESPACE is a blot on humanity,
and I'd be very glad to see pg_dump stop using it in favor of doing
things as Simon suggests.
regards, tom lane
view thread (6+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Dump/Restore of non-default PKs
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox