Re: Apparent anomaly with views and unions

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Huh. The thing I find most jarring about this way of thinking is that it means
> I can have objects in my database that don't correspond to any source code I
> have saved.

[ shrug... ] Almost any form of ALTER command gives rise to that
situation; RENAME TABLE being just the most basic. I can't find
anything compelling in that gripe. If you want your saved source
code to always describe the database, you mustn't ALTER at all.

There are certainly lots of people who do things just that way,
but they aren't the ones pushing us to add more and more ALTER
functionality ;-)

regards, tom lane