Re: ALTER TABLE ... IF EXISTS feature?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)acm(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ... IF EXISTS feature?
Date: 2010-11-05 14:49:36
Message-ID: 23644.1288968576@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
> Is there any reason why Postgres should not support an "ALTER TABLE
> tablename [IF EXISTS]" feature?

I think you've phrased the question backwards. Why *should* we support
that large increment of complexity? The use-cases seem pretty few and
far between.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-11-05 14:56:01 Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-11-05 14:43:45 Re: SQL/MED estimated time of arrival?