Greg Stark writes:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Greg Stark writes:
>>> TABLE test2 CONSTRAINT test2_y_fkey FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a);
>>
>> +1
> Even there the "TABLE" is kind of optional. It would stlil make sense as
> Referenced by:
> test2 CONSTRAINT test
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark writes:
>> So perhaps something like:
>
>> Referenced by:
>> TABLE test2 CONSTRAINT test2_y_fkey FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a);
>
> +1
>
> ... although making it *really* copy-and-pastable would require a bit
> more attention to
Greg Stark writes:
> So perhaps something like:
> Referenced by:
> TABLE test2 CONSTRAINT test2_y_fkey FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a);
+1
... although making it *really* copy-and-pastable would require a bit
more attention to detail than I bet it's gotten. (Schema qualification
and double
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Or use TABLE:
>
> "test2_y_fkey" TABLE test2 FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a)
Hm, one of the things a lot of people said they liked about the
existing list is that it was almost copy-pastable as the command to
recreate the constraint. If we
2009/6/11 Peter Eisentraut :
> Referenced by:
> "test2_y_fkey" IN test2 FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a)
>
> Is there a magic reason why the IN is capitalized? (Maybe "from" would be
> better anyway?)
Isn't "on" the conventional preposition to use here? I would think of
this as a foreign key
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> Is there a magic reason why the IN is capitalized? (Maybe "from" would be
>> better anyway?)
>
> Probably not. They were used to capitalizing "IN" for a subquery and it
> carried over; should be lowercase.
Well in that line everything
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Referenced by:
> "test2_y_fkey" IN test2 FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a)
> Is there a magic reason why the IN is capitalized? (Maybe "from" would be
> better anyway?)
I think it was probably done to make it more visually distinct from the
adjacent identifiers,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Indexes:
>> "test1_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (a)
>> Referenced by:
>> "test2_y_fkey" IN test2 FOREIGN KEY (y) REFERENCES test1(a)
>>
>> Is there a magic reason why the IN is capitalized?
> should be lowercase.
What about PRIMARY KEY, FO
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I'm having trouble coming up with a sensible translation for the last line of
> this:
>
> peter=# \d test*
> Table "public.test1"
> Column | Type | Modifiers
> +-+---
> a | integer | not null
> Indexes:
> "test1_pkey" PRIMARY KE
