Search Postgresql Archives

Re: Masquerading a unique index as a primary key in 8.4?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:21 PM, David Pirotte <dpirotte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The underlying purpose is to get Londiste to acknowledge the table's key,
> and this strategy seems to work without any problems.  Londiste doesn't seem
> to care that the "primary key" is only reflected in pg_index and isn't
> accompanied by the relevant pg_constraint entry.  Is modifying the
> underlying pg_catalog tables like this "Very Bad"?  Will it have mysterious
> and unintended consequences, or can I get away with it?  Thanks!

The badness I see that will eventually come back to bite you is that
your unique constraint is lacking "NOT NULL" and a PK by definition
has NOT NULL.  Therefore some other parts of the system is permitted
to make that assumption, and when stuff fails because you lied to the
system, you will probably never ever figure out or even know.

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



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux