Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C04A76325F4 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:40:02 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 40376-09 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 03:39:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2222262E67F for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:39:49 -0400 (AST) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1NVd2H-0002WS-14 for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:39:45 +0100 Received: from s01060015e975d7fb.wp.shawcable.net ([24.77.73.195]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:39:45 +0100 Received: from spluque by s01060015e975d7fb.wp.shawcable.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:39:45 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org From: Seb Subject: Re: rename primary key Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:39:23 -0600 Organization: Church of Emacs Lines: 18 Message-ID: <87d41c11g4.fsf@kolob.sebmags.homelinux.org> References: <87hbqo11yg.fsf@kolob.sebmags.homelinux.org> <1d581afe1001141934x2c525992w2e4bcf40a3113207@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s01060015e975d7fb.wp.shawcable.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:z1kMp9ThjI4iZX+6RsvpxuH/GXk= X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.589 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=3.188 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201001/27 X-Sequence-Number: 33563 On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:15 +0900, Ian Barwick wrote: [...] > Is this what you mean? [...] Exactly! Thanks. On a related note: how come pgadmin3 shows "Indexes (0)" for such a table, even though an index does exist for the primary key? Are these indexes created in a separate table that is looked up by the foo table? -- Seb