Is it at all a problem that several columns in pg_conversion have the same name as columns in pg_constraint?
Should the ones in pg_conversion become: convname instead of conname, etc. simply for clarity? Chris ----- Original Message ----- > Log message: > Second phase of committing Rod Taylor's pg_depend/pg_constraint patch. > pg_relcheck is gone; CHECK, UNIQUE, PRIMARY KEY, and FOREIGN KEY > constraints all have real live entries in pg_constraint. pg_depend > exists, and RESTRICT/CASCADE options work on most kinds of DROP; > however, pg_depend is not yet very well populated with dependencies. > (Most of the ones that are present at this point just replace formerly > hardwired associations, such as the implicit drop of a relation's pg_type > entry when the relation is dropped.) Need to add more logic to create > dependency entries, improve pg_dump to dump constraints in place of > indexes and triggers, and add some regression tests. > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
