Re: [HACKERS] Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key

Yes, I just think PREBUILT conveys the meaning of the command more
appropriately. I could care less though.

On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> So, would anyone be averse to something like the following:
>>
>> ALTER TABLE blah ADD ... PRIMARY KEY (...) USING PREBUILT INDEX index_hame
>>
>> If the user doesn't specify CONSTRAINT constraint_name, it will
>> default to current implicit behavior of col_pkey.
>
> This is all so that the primary key shows up with a nice "PRIMARY KEY" instead
> of just the unique index?
>
> The "PREBUILT" seems unnecessary in that syntax.
>
> --
> Gregory Stark
> EnterpriseDB

http://www.enterprisedb.com
> Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!
>

--
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers