Re: BUG #18295: In PostgreSQL a unique index on targeted columns is sufficient to support a foreign key
От | David Rowley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18295: In PostgreSQL a unique index on targeted columns is sufficient to support a foreign key |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAApHDvpMps521Pih_ccrffzyv0SFtC0TuB6vULqhrrxzfW+o3w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18295: In PostgreSQL a unique index on targeted columns is sufficient to support a foreign key (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18295: In PostgreSQL a unique index on targeted columns is sufficient to support a foreign key
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 at 01:14, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote: > Attached is a modified patch. I think it looks mostly fine. I'd only adjust the following addition to be a new paragraph: - <title>Foreign-Key Constraint Actions</title> + <title>Foreign-Key Constraints</title> <para> The ability to specify column lists in the foreign-key actions <literal>SET DEFAULT</literal> and <literal>SET NULL</literal> is a <productname>PostgreSQL</productname> extension. + It is also a <productname>PostgreSQL</productname> extension that a + foreign key constraint may reference a unique index instead of a + primary key or unique constraint. </para> and drop the "also" at the same time. I also noticed that, generally, we're not that consistent if we spell it "foreign-key" or "foreign key". You're introducing "foreign key" in a location where there are a couple of "foreign-key"s. Maybe it's better to be consistent in at least that location? David
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: