From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump --binary-upgrade vs. ALTER TYPE ... DROP ATTRIBUTE |
Date: | 2011-04-14 12:36:19 |
Message-ID: | 20110414123619.GC15286@tornado.leadboat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:46:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > If we adopt the elsewhere-proposed approach of forbidding the use of
> > rowtypes to create typed tables, the circularity-checking logic here
> > can become simpler. I think it's not actually water-tight right now:
>
> > rhaas=# create table a (x int);
> > CREATE TABLE
> > rhaas=# create table b of a;
> > CREATE TABLE
> > rhaas=# create table c () inherits (b);
> > CREATE TABLE
> > rhaas=# create table d of c;
> > CREATE TABLE
> > rhaas=# alter table a of d;
> > ALTER TABLE
>
> "alter table a of d"? What the heck does that mean, and why would it be
> a good idea?
CREATE TABLE a ...; ...; ALTER TABLE a OF d; = CREATE TABLE a OF d;
It's a good idea as a heavy lifter for `pg_dump --binary-upgrade'. See the rest
of this thread for the full background.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | A.M. | 2011-04-14 14:26:33 | Re: POSIX shared memory redux |
Previous Message | Florian Weimer | 2011-04-14 12:22:00 | Re: POSIX shared memory redux |