| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Dunstan" <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <momjian(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update: < * Allow adding enumerated values to an existing |
| Date: | 2008-04-25 22:28:57 |
| Message-ID: | 2143.1209162537@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Dunstan" <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:51 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Further, as already noted, if you do have to rewrite then a series of
>> manual ALTER COLUMN TYPE operations would probably be a *better* answer
>> than a monolithic implementation, because of the locking problems
>> involved in doing it in one transaction.
> I don't understand this if it's calling option 2 the monolithic
> implementation.
No, I was imagining an option-1 implementation trying to support
rewriting of all affected tables in a single "monolithic" command.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | User Eggyknap | 2008-04-25 23:15:32 | pllolcode - pllolcode: Remove debug code |
| Previous Message | Tom Dunstan | 2008-04-25 22:01:37 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update: < * Allow adding enumerated values to an existing |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacques Caron | 2008-04-25 23:27:45 | FSM fill ratio |
| Previous Message | Tom Dunstan | 2008-04-25 22:01:37 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update: < * Allow adding enumerated values to an existing |