| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN |
| Date: | 2002-07-04 12:20:19 |
| Message-ID: | 200207041220.g64CKJX28622@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > Well in the renumbering case, the client needs to know about missing attnos
> > and it has to know to ignore negative attnos (which it probably does
> > already). ie. psql and pg_dump wouldn't have to be modified in that case.
> > In the isdropped case, the client needs to know to exclude any column with
> > 'attisdropped' set to true.
> > So in both cases, the client needs to be updated.
>
> How about defining a view (or views) which hides these details? Perhaps
> a view which is also defined in SQL99 as one of the information_schema
> views which we might like to have anyway?
We could change pg_attribute to another name, and create a view called
pg_attribute that never returned isdropped columns to the client. That
would allow clients to work cleanly, and the server to work cleanly.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2002-07-04 14:21:01 | Re: [HACKERS] ecpg problem : pre-processor translated long constant to char |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2002-07-04 11:59:49 | Re: Scope of constraint names |