From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Well, then you keep your darn columns |
Date: | 2000-01-24 18:45:43 |
Message-ID: | 26163.948739543@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Let's see: DROP COLUMN would have to mark the column invisible, remove
> any associated constraints (particularly NOT NULL) and indexes, and
> it'd be done. The parser would then have to ignore the column when
> doing column name lookups or expansion of '*', and it would have to
> insert a NULL value for the column when transforming INSERT or UPDATE.
> And that'd be just about it. I like it.
On further reflection I can think of a few other places that would have
to be taught to skip over "invisible" columns: COPY and pg_dump would,
and probably there are some others. But it still seems like this is
a simple and robust scheme with considerable advantages, and many
fewer "I'm not sure how to do that" gaps in it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Don Baccus | 2000-01-24 18:56:05 | Re: [HACKERS] column aliases |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-24 18:30:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Well, then you keep your darn columns |