From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE TODO items |
Date: | 2004-05-07 02:02:22 |
Message-ID: | 27334.1083895342@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> What happens with ordering of operations in the ALTER TABLE statement?
> Like if I put an alter TYPE and a SET STORAGE in the same statement
> (wiht commas between), in what order will things happen?
The "right thing" will happen --- in this case, the SET STORAGE will
take effect (before we actually rewrite the table, so the end result
will be exactly what you want). Check out the multiple-pass structure
in commands/tablecmds.c.
> Is it deterministic? Is it documented? Are there situations where a
> crazy collection of 20 commands in a single ALTER TABLE will have
> unpredictable effects?
Yes, no (I did say we needed more docs effort), and I hope not.
> Also, should the syntax be SET TYPE, not just TYPE?
Shrug ... I dunno whether Rod had a precedent for that choice or not.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-05-07 02:26:13 | Re: psql 7.3.4 disagrees with NATURAL CROSS JOIN |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-05-07 01:50:24 | Re: ALTER TABLE TODO items |