On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@xxxxxxx> writes: >> On fre, 2010-04-09 at 18:01 -0400, Josh Kupershmidt wrote: >>> I often come across tables with either a unique index or a unique >>> constraint on them, and psql isn't helpful at showing the difference >>> between the two. Normally, I don't care which is which, except for >>> when I have to manually drop and recreate the index or constraint to >>> speed up a bulk load. > >> Yes, I have also been annoyed by that. Perhaps you could work out a >> proposed change and send it to the hackers list. You don't necessarily >> need to code it up, but make some mock-ups about how things would look >> in different situations. > > Please note that we already rejected the use of a separate constraints > subheading in connection with EXCLUDE constraints; a patch to introduce > one in order to distinguish unique constraints from manually-created > unique indexes isn't likely to fare much better. My recollection is > that it's intentional that psql obscures the difference, because for > most querying purposes there isn't any difference. I agree that > sometimes you'd like to know the difference, so I could see making some > small change that would make it possible to tell the difference when > needed. But I think it shouldn't make the two cases look completely > unrelated. Maybe something like saying "unique constraint" vs just > "unique" would fly. Yeah, probably make it show up for \d+ or something. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
