| From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Susanne Ebrecht <miracee(at)miracee(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: [DOCS] rename of a view |
| Date: | 2007-07-03 06:38:07 |
| Message-ID: | 4689EECF.9080902@kaltenbrunner.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-patches |
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-02-07 at 23:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Er, was this on the agenda for 8.3?
>
> Well, it seemed fairly harmless to me (no behavioral changes and very
> little new code, just syntax), so I didn't see a compelling reason to
> delay applying it for a few months. But I can revert it if you'd prefer.
hmm so now we have ALTER VIEW/SEQUENCE commands that can do a bit but
not all of what ALTER TABLE can do (renaming columns of a VIEW or
changing the owner for example).
I agree in principle that having those functionality in ALTER
VIEW/SEQUENCE is a good idea but only bringing in a bit of the required
functionality which still does not solve the "uhm why do I need ALTER
TABLE to manipulate a VIEW" months after the feature freeze sounds a bit
wrong to me :-(
Stefan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-03 13:56:42 | Re: [DOCS] rename of a view |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2007-07-03 05:50:27 | Re: [DOCS] rename of a view |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-07-03 08:39:58 | Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints, final patch |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2007-07-03 05:50:27 | Re: [DOCS] rename of a view |