From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | 'Tom Lane' <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Rename sequence bug/feature |
Date: | 2002-02-27 08:34:28 |
Message-ID: | FED2B709E3270E4B903EB0175A49BCB1047634@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 27 February 2002 05:20
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Rename sequence bug/feature
>
>
> Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > I noticed in a post recently that it was possible to rename objects
> > other than tables in pg_class using ALTER TABLE RENAME. I've now
> > implemented this in pgAdmin II for views, sequences and indexes.
>
> > Today I've had cause to dump my test database and found a minor
> > problem:
>
> > dumping database "helpdesk"...
> > pg_dump: query to get data of sequence "cat" returned name "dog"
>
> Well, we could either add code to ALTER RENAME to hack the
> sequence name stored in sequences, or we could remove that
> check from pg_dump. I kinda lean to the latter myself; it
> seems pretty useless.
That could potentially break any user apps that (for whatever bizarre
reason) do a select sequence_name of course, though I can't imagine why
anyone would do that. pgAdmin certainly doesn't.
Either fix would be fine for me though...
Thanks, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karel Zak | 2002-02-27 08:52:51 | Re: timestamp_part() bug? |
Previous Message | Janardhana Reddy | 2002-02-27 08:22:42 | Re: WAL Performance Improvements |