"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 1. A non-unique index is already defined over (a, b)
>>
>> - Either add new index or promote existing one to unique?
> Promoting is in my too-hard basket, so I will simply add a new unique index?
> Too bad if it slows them down, as they sh
OK, so just to summarize:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Christopher
> Kings-Lynne
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 July 2001 9:39 AM
> To: Hackers
> Subject: [HACKERS] More ADD CONSTRAINT behaviour questions
>
>
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 6. A unique index is already defined over (b, a)
>
> > - As above. Technically a different index, but effect
> > as far as uniqueness is concerned is identical?
>
> This case *must not* be an error IMHO: it's perfectly reason
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> When someone issues this command:
>
> ALTER TABLE test ADD UNIQUE (a, b);
>
> What happens when:
>
> 1. A non-unique index is already defined over (a, b)
>
> - Either add new index or promote existing one to unique?
Well, either wor
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 6. A unique index is already defined over (b, a)
> - As above. Technically a different index, but effect
> as far as uniqueness is concerned is identical?
This case *must not* be an error IMHO: it's perfectly reasonable to ha
When someone issues this command:
ALTER TABLE test ADD UNIQUE (a, b);
What happens when:
1. A non-unique index is already defined over (a, b)
- Either add new index or promote existing one to unique?
2. A non-unique index is already defined over (b, a)
- As above?
3. A prima
