On Wednesday, November 13, 2024, "Сергей П (SergeiDos)" < podrezov.ser...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <https://translate.google.com/about/?hl=ru> > <https://policies.google.com/?hl=ru> > <https://support.google.com/translate/?hl=ru> > <https://www.google.com/about?hl=ru> > <https://translate.google.com/about/?hl=ru> > <https://policies.google.com/?hl=ru> > <https://support.google.com/translate/?hl=ru> > <https://www.google.com/about?hl=ru> > Hello! > In the documentation for the Constraints section > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-constraints.html there is a > phrase: "So, to specify a named constraint, use the key word CONSTRAINT > followed by an identifier followed by the constraint definition. (If you > can't specify a constraint name in this way, the system choose a name for > you.)" > But nowhere in the documentation are the rules by which it generates names > on its own described. > Correct. Which means the specific name chosen is an implementation detail that can change at any time and should not be relied upon by the DBA. It could be a randomly generated uuid for all it matters, but we do make some attempt to make it readable. Since they are user-facing values I do see some benefit to defining what is being seen, though precisely how and to what purpose I am unsure. If you see a name it seems self-describing what it means if you have familiarity with relational databases. Telling a user what they will get when they execute SQL without specifying a name is not something I would want to document. David J. <https://translate.google.com/history> > <https://translate.google.com/saved> > <https://translate.google.com/history> > <https://translate.google.com/saved> >
