| From: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DROP COLUMN |
| Date: | 2002-07-16 05:02:14 |
| Message-ID: | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOMECLCDAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Actually, the original argument for negative attno's for dropped columns
> was exactly for this case, that the system column check would catch
> dropped columns too, but it causes other problems that are harder to fix
> so we _dropped_ the idea.
Well, negative attnums are a good idea and yes, you sort of avoid all these
problems. However, the backend is _full_ of stuff like this:
if (attnum < 0)
elog(ERROR, "Cannot footle system attribute.");
But the problem is that we'd have to change all of them anyway in a negative
attnum implementation, since they're not system attributes, they're dropped
columns.
But let's not start another thread about this!!
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-07-16 05:03:14 | Re: DROP COLUMN |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-16 04:58:50 | Re: DROP COLUMN |