Re: Disallow USING clause when altering type of generated column

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Disallow USING clause when altering type of generated column
Date: 2024-08-22 08:49:22
Message-ID: b3fbd328-9481-4125-8f90-cc40c24b30d4@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 22.08.24 09:59, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>>> Although ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLE_DEFINITION is used for en error on changing
>>> type of inherited column, I guess that is because it prevents from breaking
>>> consistency between inherited and inheriting tables as a result of the command.
>>> In this sense, maybe, ERRCODE_INVALID_COLUMN_DEFINITION is proper here, because
>>> this check is to prevent inconsistency between columns in a tuple.
>>
>> Yes, that was my thinking. I think of ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED as
>> "we could add it in the future", but that does not seem to apply here.
>
> + (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLE_DEFINITION),
> + errmsg("cannot specify USING when altering type of generated column"),
> + errdetail("Column \"%s\" is a generated column.", colName)));
>
> Do you thnik ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLE_DEFINITION is more proper than
> ERRCODE_INVALID_COLUMN_DEFINITION in this case?

COLUMN seems better here.

I copied TABLE from the "cannot alter system column" above, but maybe
that is a different situation.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message 陈宗志 2024-08-22 08:49:55 Re: Some questions about PostgreSQL’s design.
Previous Message Alexandra Wang 2024-08-22 08:36:31 Re: Index AM API cleanup