Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance

Clark C. Evans wrote:

>
>| >   * Issue a warning when creating a constraint who's name is
>| >     not unique within its (the constraint's) schema.
>| 
>| I don't have a problem with it (once, I argued for following the spec
>| constraint on this way back when), however I think this was proposed and
>| rejected before as excess noise.  You might want to look back through the
>| archives.
>
>I think the problem /w the noise was that default trigger names were
>not automatically prefixed with the table name.  I'd like to see this
>warning; perhaps in the next release, the ``dump`` module can rename
>constraints like $1 and $2 to include the table name?
>
>Given that both of these issues consist of first changing the dumper and
>making an optional warning (at first) and then turning it into an error
>way down the line, could they be considered part of the same ticket?
>
>
>  
>

Ticket?  :-) You might like to read up on how our development process 
works. See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html

Among other things, note that we don't really have a ticket system.

More substantively, I think making an option to have pg_dump prepend the 
table name to autogenned $n type constraint names is not a bad idea.

cheers

andrew