Re: ALTER TABLE ... IF EXISTS feature?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ... IF EXISTS feature?
Date: 2010-11-05 15:11:04
Message-ID: C6EEAE4F-15C4-4140-8932-0625FEB4F524@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
>> Is there any reason why Postgres should not support an "ALTER TABLE
>> tablename [IF EXISTS]" feature?
>
> I think you've phrased the question backwards. Why *should* we support
> that large increment of complexity? The use-cases seem pretty few and
> far between.

Obviously we have different definitions of "a large increment in complexity".

...Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-11-05 15:44:14 Re: ALTER TABLE ... IF EXISTS feature?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-11-05 14:56:01 Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger