| From: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Gauthier, Dave" <dave(dot)gauthier(at)intel(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Pulling data from a constraint def |
| Date: | 2010-05-14 04:00:57 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTilL0epQ69gi6bLwaj34apauaWYyfhcWkLUnemHv@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Well, the inability to change the list of values is certainly an
> unpleasant limitation, but is it so fatal that we should hide the
> feature from people who could possibly use it? I think not.
I happened upon this article relevant to the subject after googling a bit:
http://www.justatheory.com/computers/databases/postgresql/enforce-set-of-values.html
One of the comments suggests adding an entry to pg_enum to expand the
legal values of an existing ENUM type. How safe is this idea?
Josh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-14 04:32:12 | Re: Pulling data from a constraint def |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-05-14 03:46:07 | Re: List traffic |