*>1. INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS does not bring over the Foreign Keys* >Not a bug since the documentation states that the only additional constraints that are brought over are check constraints. Not Null constraints are always brought >over.
Hmmm, The document would be a lot clearly if it simply stated Foreign Keys are NOT brought over. Anyhow, I've found a work around for that, *>2. INCLUDING ALL does not work and generates an ERROR;* >For kicks does writing it out in long form work? No. I tried INCLUDING ALL and just ALL by itself, both create a syntax error. On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:51 PM, David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Melvin Davidson <melvin6...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> *O/S = Windows 10PostgreSQL 9.2.10, compiled by Visual C++ build 1600, >> 32-bit* >> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/sql-createtable.html >> >> >> and like_option is: >> >> { INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { DEFAULTS | CONSTRAINTS | INDEXES | STORAGE | >> COMMENTS | ALL } >> >> *1. INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS does not bring over the Foreign Keys* >> > > Not a bug since the documentation states that the only additional > constraints that are brought over are check constraints. Not Null > constraints are always brought over. > > """ > Not-null constraints are always copied to the new table. CHECK constraints > will only be copied if INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS is specified; other types of > constraints will never be copied. Also, no distinction is made between > column constraints and table constraints — when constraints are requested, > all check constraints are copied. > """ > > >> *2. INCLUDING ALL does not work and generates an ERROR;* >> > > For kicks does writing it out in long form work? > > """ > INCLUDING ALL is an abbreviated form of INCLUDING DEFAULTS INCLUDING > CONSTRAINTS INCLUDING INDEXES INCLUDING STORAGE INCLUDING COMMENTS. > """ > > David J. > > -- *Melvin Davidson* I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
