Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> We are not going to try to enforce uniqueness. This has been debated
>> before, and most people like the current behavior just fine, or at least
>> better than the alternatives.
> Really? I thought the issue was that no one had figured out how to do
> it, or that no one had written the patch, not that anyone thought the
> current behavior was particularly desirable. What happens if you say
> ALTER TABLE .. DROP CONSTRAINT or COMMENT ON CONSTRAINT? You just
> pick one at random?
No, because those syntaxes constrain the choice to one single
constraint. Perhaps if the SQL committee had designed 'em,
there'd be an issue; but they are Postgres-isms.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
