On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 4:28 AM, Viktor Valy wrote:
> OK, I see. Thanks for mentioning it.
> Are there other problems with the suggestion? Or should the work like that?
I think you'll just need to give it a try and see how it goes. I
think we've covered most of the possible sticking points that
OK, I see. Thanks for mentioning it.
Are there other problems with the suggestion? Or should the work like that?
Viktor
2010/11/10 Robert Haas
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Viktor Valy wrote:
> > Thanks for your answer!
> > I'm not really familiar with inheritance, but I wonder how this i
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Viktor Valy wrote:
> Thanks for your answer!
> I'm not really familiar with inheritance, but I wonder how this issue
> is handled in other cases, for instance renaming an index, which invokes
> internal a constraint rename too. Is that relevant or is the renaming o
Thanks for your answer!
I'm not really familiar with inheritance, but I wonder how this issue
is handled in other cases, for instance renaming an index, which invokes
internal a constraint rename too. Is that relevant or is the renaming of
constraints so special?
Is there a solution for the test-c
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Viktor Valy wrote:
> Hi Everybody!
> I looked up this todo, and figured out a plan, how the implementation could
> be written.
> The main challenge is to keep constraints and indexes (for unique and PK
> constraints) consistent.
> Fortunately this is already realiz
