nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) writes:
> Currently, ALTER TABLE ... OWNER will change the ownership of a table,
> view, sequence or index -- despite the fact that its name hints that it
> is only for 'altering tables'.
> 1) Is this behavior optimal? There is clearly a need to change the
> ownership of relations other than tables, but it seems to me that
> pushing this functionality into ALTER TABLE is unintuitive.
> On the other hand, creating ALTER INDEX ... OWNER, ALTER SEQUENCE ...
> OWNER, etc. seems like overkill.
Definitely overkill. I'd say tweak the docs and leave the code alone.
regards, tom lane