From: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Butler <butlerm(at)middle(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE MODIFY COLUMN |
Date: | 2001-04-13 05:52:37 |
Message-ID: | 3AD69425.13CA75A4@tpf.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Mark Butler wrote:
>
> I was looking at how hard it would be to support altering column types and it
> seems to me that it would be trivial to support changing nullability,
Yes. The problem is how to formulate 'DROP CONSTRAINT' feature.
> increasing the maximum length of the VARCHAR data type and increasing the
> precision or scale of the DECIMAL / NUMERIC data type.
>
Yes. The problem is how PostgreSQL could recognize the fact.
[snip]
> I understand that with the current heap tuple format described in
> backend/access/common.c that changing the type of any fixed length attribute
> requires updating every row.
>
> Surely if we have an write exclusive table lock we can rewrite tuples in place
> rather than creating new versions with its corresponding 2x space requirement.
>
PostgreSQL has a no overwrite storage manager, so this
seems to have little advantage. We now have a mechanism
to replace existent relation files safely. We could
avoid running VACUUM, multiple version of tuples in
a file etc ...
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-04-13 06:35:07 | Re: Yacc / Bison difficulties |
Previous Message | Mark Butler | 2001-04-13 05:21:16 | Re: DOUBLE synonym for DOUBLE PRECISION |