On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Hi, > > I notice on the SET CONSTRAINTS doc page, it says SET CONSTRAINTS > <constraint> ... > > But it doesn't at all make it clear what <constraint> is, since cosntraint > names are per-relation I thought?
It's a constraint name. IIRC, it happens to affect all such named constraints currently. We should probably allow <tablename>.<constraint> (and <schema>.<tablename>.<constraint>) as well. Too late for 7.4, but this can happen for 7.5 if there aren't any objections. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
