Yes, I just think PREBUILT conveys the meaning of the command more appropriately. I could care less though.
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> So, would anyone be averse to something like the following: >> >> ALTER TABLE blah ADD ... PRIMARY KEY (...) USING PREBUILT INDEX index_hame >> >> If the user doesn't specify CONSTRAINT constraint_name, it will >> default to current implicit behavior of col_pkey. > > This is all so that the primary key shows up with a nice "PRIMARY KEY" instead > of just the unique index? > > The "PREBUILT" seems unnecessary in that syntax. > > -- > Gregory Stark > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com > Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support! > -- Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324 EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301 499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
