Re: Disallow USING clause when altering type of generated column

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Disallow USING clause when altering type of generated column
Date: 2024-08-29 07:15:51
Message-ID: 7964fa14-8eda-401b-b860-766ad1cf5543@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 22.08.24 10:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 22.08.24 09:59, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>>>> Although ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLE_DEFINITION is used for en error on
>>>> changing
>>>> type of inherited column, I guess that is because it prevents from
>>>> breaking
>>>> consistency between inherited and inheriting tables as a result of
>>>> the command.
>>>> In this sense, maybe, ERRCODE_INVALID_COLUMN_DEFINITION is proper
>>>> here, because
>>>> this check is to prevent inconsistency between columns in a tuple.
>>>
>>> Yes, that was my thinking.  I think of ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED as
>>> "we could add it in the future", but that does not seem to apply here.
>>
>> +                (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLE_DEFINITION),
>> +                 errmsg("cannot specify USING when altering type of
>> generated column"),
>> +                 errdetail("Column \"%s\" is a generated column.",
>> colName)));
>>
>> Do you thnik ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLE_DEFINITION is more proper than
>> ERRCODE_INVALID_COLUMN_DEFINITION in this case?
>
> COLUMN seems better here.

Committed and backpatched, with that adjustment.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bharath Rupireddy 2024-08-29 07:25:59 Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2024-08-29 07:01:34 Re: Little cleanup of ShmemInit function names