Re: [OT] why not keeping the original column name in catalog after a drop?

From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)infinito(dot)it>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [OT] why not keeping the original column name in catalog after a drop?
Date: 2013-11-13 07:59:14
Message-ID: CABOikdNpDCB_-aPs8-zKzs-k0bmW_f5-Jww0XWFaJQeKvD28Cw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)infinito(dot)it> wrote:

>
>
> I'm wondering what is the problem in placing the old/original name
> after the "pg.dropped" prefix. I know that the tuple in pg_attribute
> is temporary, but what are the possible conflicts the comment talks
> about?
>
>
May be when a column with the same name is added and again dropped ? Of
course, we can have the attribute number and column name both to avoid
conflict.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rohit Goyal 2013-11-13 07:59:42 Re: Information about Access methods
Previous Message Luca Ferrari 2013-11-13 07:52:27 [OT] why not keeping the original column name in catalog after a drop?