From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Andreas <maps.on@gmx.net>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Notation of index
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:36:53 +0100
Message-ID: <200401071936.53243.peter_e@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FFC3D30.2080508@gmx.net>
References: <3FFC3D30.2080508@gmx.net>
Andreas wrote:
> Why can['t] we use INDEX the same way as UNIQUE ?
> Perhaps even as in
> ...
> numba INT4 NOT NULL INDEX
> ...
If the choice were just index or no index, then this might be ok, but
when you create an index you can choose the index type, the operator
class, a partial index predicate, so the notation would quickly become
complicated. You can also consider similar arguments about why rules
and triggers are created separately.
What would clearly be useful is a way to automatically generate names
for indexes. Maybe we should think about implementing something for
that.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: peter_e@gmx.net, maps.on@gmx.net
Subject: Re: Notation of index
In-Reply-To: <200401071936.53243.peter_e@gmx.net>
* 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