Re: Should we allow ALTER OPERATOR CLASS to ADD/DROP operators and procedures?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we allow ALTER OPERATOR CLASS to ADD/DROP operators and procedures?
Date: 2025-02-07 00:15:09
Message-ID: 1328356.1738887309@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> writes:
> Which is why PostGIS devs chose a different path - updating the catalogs
> to modify the opclass definition [3], using this script [4].

> That's a bit ... terrifying.

Indeed. Did it not occur to them to use ALTER OPERATOR FAMILY?

The end result of doing so is that the added opfamily members
wouldn't have been bound tightly to the opclass, but that does
not seem like a huge deal in context. They'd still have worked
fine AFAIK.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Anton A. Melnikov 2025-02-07 00:15:17 FSM doesn't recover after zeroing damaged page.
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2025-02-06 23:25:30 Should we allow ALTER OPERATOR CLASS to ADD/DROP operators and procedures?