Re: an already existing alter table drop column ?!?!?!

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: "Gowey, Geoffrey" <ggowey(at)rxhope(dot)com>
Cc: "'Hiroshi Inoue'" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: an already existing alter table drop column ?!?!?!
Date: 2001-09-24 17:13:39
Message-ID: 20010924131336.H58361-100000@mail1.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


isn't

On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Gowey, Geoffrey wrote:

> Does this mean that the code is or isn't usable?
>
> Geoff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp]
> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 11:02 PM
> To: Stephan Szabo
> Cc: Gowey, Geoffrey; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] an already existing alter table drop column ?!?!?!
>
>
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Gowey, Geoffrey wrote:
> >
> > > While looking through the code I found an already existing alter table
> drop
> > > column in src/backend/parser/gram.y. However, when I try to run it in
> psql
> > > it comes back with a not implemented. Was the left hand not talking to
> the
> > > right hand when this was coded or is there more to this?
> >
> > IIRC, it was not enabled pending further discussion of the behavior.
>
> As to 'DROP COLUMN', I neglected to remove _DROP_COLUMN_HACK__
> stuff which has no meaing now sorry. I would remove it after
> the 7.2 release.
>
> regards,
> Hiroshi Inoue
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gowey, Geoffrey 2001-09-24 17:18:21 Re: an already existing alter table drop column ?!?!?!
Previous Message Patrick Welche 2001-09-24 17:04:17 Re: anoncvs failure...