Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key

Tom Lane wrote:

> Apparently your definition of "easy" depends entirely on
> keystrokes and not at all on memory/cognitive burden.

I was trying to remove one opportunity for human error, which is tied to 
memory and cognitive burden. It is very easy to fat finger something. Is 
it a critical error? No. Is it obnoxious to have to go back and fix it, 
yes. When you are going back to fix, are you going to be grousing about 
how PostgreSQL doesn't make this easier, maybe.

> 
> IMHO a utility command should do one easily-explained thing.  The fewer
> options the better.

I would agree with this except that by my definition your argument 
fails. You are adding options by not allowing a sane default that 
applies consistency to the database. I believe this will cause more 
trouble than having the limitation in the first place.

Anyway, I have made my arguments. I believe we are still in the middle 
of a commit fest.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake