On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Clark C. Evans wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 11:51:55AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > > | > This has been discussed previously in a couple of threads. I believe the > > | > desire is to make it work as specified in SQL-2003, but I do not > > remember > > | > whether or not anyone volunteered to do the work to make it happen. > > | > > | I believe that the newsysviews follow the SQL03 permissions structure. > > > > Fantastic! The SQL92 permission structure was braindead. > > > > After some time working with the information schema, I have > > three suggestions: > > > > * for foreign-key and check constraints, the default names > > are $1, $2, etc.; it would be great if they were "upgraded" > > to use the default names given by primary and unique key > > constraints: table_uk_1stcol, table_pk > > Err... what version are you using? I get constraint names like tt_a_fkey > from devel, and I thought at least 8.1 does the same. > > > * when creating a foreign key constraint on two columns, say > > from A (x, y) to B (x, y), if the unique index on B is (x,y) > > you can make a foreign key from A->B using (y,x) > > I don't understand which particular case you're complaining about, but as > far as I can see, we have to allow that case by the rest of the spec. If > A(x) is comparable to B(x) and B(y) and A(y) is comparable to B(x) and > B(y), all of A(x,y)->B(x,y), A(y,x)->B(x,y), A(x,y)->B(y,x) and > A(y,x)->B(y,x) seem to be allowed by the definition in the constraint > section (as only the sets must be equal, with no mention of ordering).
The sets in this case being the referenced columns and the unique columns in the unique constraint. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
