From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: renameatt() can rename attribute of index, sequence, ... |
Date: | 2010-03-03 13:42:15 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f071003030542w57c33ba9u70da1d7ba78ed260@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2010/3/3 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
> (2010/03/03 14:26), Robert Haas wrote:
>> 2010/3/2 KaiGai Kohei<kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
>>> Is it an expected behavior?
>>>
>>> postgres=> CREATE SEQUENCE s;
>>> CREATE SEQUENCE
>>> postgres=> ALTER TABLE s RENAME sequence_name TO abcd;
>>> ALTER TABLE
>>>
>>> postgres=> CREATE TABLE t (a int primary key, b text);
>>> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "t_pkey" for table "t"
>>> CREATE TABLE
>>> postgres=> ALTER TABLE t_pkey RENAME a TO xyz;
>>> ALTER TABLE
>>>
>>> The documentation says:
>>> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-altertable.html
>>>
>>> :
>>> RENAME
>>> The RENAME forms change the name of a table (or an index, sequence, or view) or
>>> the name of an individual column in a table. There is no effect on the stored data.
>>>
>>> It seems to me the renameatt() should check relkind of the specified relation, and
>>> raise an error if relkind != RELKIND_RELATION.
>>
>> Are we talking about renameatt() or RenameRelation()? Letting
>> RenameRelation() rename whatever seems fairly harmless; renameatt(),
>> on the other hand, should probably refuse to allow this:
>>
>> CREATE SEQUENCE foo;
>> ALTER TABLE foo RENAME COLUMN is_cycled TO bob;
>>
>> ...because that's just weird. Tables, indexes, and views make sense,
>> but the attributes of a sequence should be nailed down I think;
>> they're basically system properties.
>
> I'm talking about renameatt(), not RenameRelation().
OK. Your original example was misleading because you had renameatt()
in the subject line but the actual SQL commands were renaming a whole
relation (which is a reasonable thing to do).
> If our perspective is these are a type of system properties, we should
> be able to reference these attributes with same name, so it is not harmless
> to allow renaming these attributes.
>
> I also agree that it makes sense to allow renaming attributes of tables
> and views. But I don't know whether it makes sense to allow it on indexs,
> like sequence and toast relations.
I would think not.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-03-03 14:03:29 | Re: Streaming replication and pg_xlogfile_name() |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-03-03 13:15:57 | Re: Streaming rep - why log shipping is necessary? |