Horton

Re: enhanced error fields

Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Date: 2012-12-29T20:07:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Create a "sort support" interface API for faster sorting.

2012/12/29 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>:
> * Pavel Stehule (pavel.stehule@gmail.com) wrote:
>> > Having just constraint_schema and constraint_name feels horribly wrong
>> > as the definition of a constraint also includes a pg_class oid.
>>
>> but then TABLE_NAME and TABLE_SCHEMA will be defined.
>
> How are you going to look up the constraint?  Using constraint_schema,
> table_name, and constraint_name?  Or table_schema, table_name and
> constraint_name?  When do you use constraint_schema instead of
> table_schema?
>
> None of those options is exactly clear or understandable...

probably there will be situation when TABLE_SCHEMA and
CONSTRAINT_SCHEMA same values

Hypothetically - if we define CONSTRAINT_TABLE - what is difference
from TABLE_NAME ?

Pavel



>
>         Thanks,
>
>                 Stephen