From: | ash <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re-create dependent views on ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN ... TYPE? |
Date: | 2014-05-26 20:37:32 |
Message-ID: | 87a9a4jmyb.fsf@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 06:25:09PM +0400, ash wrote:
>> Hi Hackers,
>>
>> This came up recently on general list (and I've just hit the same issue today):
>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqTLmMn1LTb5WE0v0dO57iP0U73yKwzbZytAXDF1CAWLZg@mail.gmail.com
>>
>> Why couldn't postgres re-create the dependent views automatically? I
>> mean it knows which views depend on the altered column and keeps the
>> view definition, no?
>
> Also worth considering: functions which take any part of the view as a
> parameter.
Sorry, I don't get it: do you suggest we should re-create dependent
functions too?
I don't think that's feasible, but there is certainly a use case for
silently re-defining the views together with alteration of the joined
table.
--
Alex
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-05-26 21:19:05 | Re: Allowing line-continuation in pgbench custom scripts |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-05-26 20:22:07 | Stating the significance of Lehman & Yao in the nbtree README |