From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Kyle <kyle@actarg.com>
Subject: Re: Getting FK relationships from information_schema
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 08:36:25 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.1
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
References: <40C500D8.9060009@actarg.com> <40C5D790.6090407@actarg.com>
	<16089.1086757487@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <16089.1086757487@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200406090836.25473.peter_e@gmx.net>

Tom Lane wrote:
> Kyle <kyle@actarg.com> writes:
> > I think this is only an issue when the user relies on postgres to
> > choose a constraint name automatically.  Seems like a reasonable
> > approach would be to have postgres choose a name for the constraint
> > that happens to be unique in the schema (like tablename_fkey_$1).
>
> We have discussed changing the default names of FK constraints
> before. I have no problem with doing something like the above --- any
> objection out there?

I think it's a good idea.  It will also make the error messages of the 
kind "foreign key $1 violated" a bit clearer by default.

There will, however, be complaints that the constraint names are not 
automatically renamed with the table; but we are used to those by now.