On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:56, Bernd Helmle <maili...@oopsware.de> wrote: > I've just started looking into this and wonder how this should look like.
IIRC another motivation for moving them into pg_constraint was we could then give them names as required by the spec (unless I got mixed up with defaults). Looking at the 2003 spec I don't see any grammar for that, so either I cant find it (likely) or its not there. Either way I see something like the below options: ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN ADD CONSTRAINT my_not_null NOT NULL; [ we dont currently support add constraint on ALTER COLUMN AFAICT... but it might be nice? ] -or- ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT my_not_null NOT NULL (column); -or- ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN column SET NOT NULL 'name'; Comments? Anyway Bernd if you are working on this great! If not lemme know, Ill plan on having something for the next commit feast. Though I still may never get around to it :(. FYI defaults have the same problem. Would it be awkward would it be to use pg_constraint for the book keeping as well? [ and by that I really mean ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT my_default DEFAULT .... so you can give them a name ] -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
