X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C944D1E944 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:25:07 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98706-03 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:25:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 152EFD1E129 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:25:04 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i3DDP4V2021879; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 09:25:04 -0400 (EDT) To: Greg Stark Cc: Bret Hughes , Stephan Szabo , postgresql sql list Subject: Re: trigger/for key help In-reply-to: <873c78e6wf.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> References: <1081662204.6609.72.camel@bretsony> <20040411080932.Q83278@megazone.bigpanda.com> <1081711155.6399.165.camel@bretsony> <17189.1081720813@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1081724318.2628.20.camel@bretsony> <28212.1081736841@sss.pgh.pa.us> <873c78e6wf.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> Comments: In-reply-to Greg Stark message dated "13 Apr 2004 02:20:00 -0400" Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 09:25:04 -0400 Message-ID: <21878.1081862704@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200404/116 X-Sequence-Number: 17491 Greg Stark writes: > Is there a reason postgres goes out of its way to pick names that > will be harder to work with than necessary? If we use ordinary identifiers for system-generated names then we will be infringing on user name space --- ie, there's a potential for conflict. I suppose we could use long randomly-generated names like ewjncm343cnlen, but are those really easier to work with? I think a more useful approach is to treat it as a documentation problem. Perhaps an example in the ALTER TABLE man page would help. regards, tom lane