Re: AW: AW: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: AW: AW: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN
Date: 2000-10-14 01:15:11
Message-ID: 1022.971486111@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> This said, I think Hiroshi's patch seems a perfect starting point, no ?

> Having phantom columns adds additional complexity to the system overall.
> We have to decide we really want it before making things more complex
> than they already are.

I think we do, because it solves more than just the ALTER DROP COLUMN
problem: it cleans up other sore spots too. Like ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN
in a table with child tables.

Of course, it depends on just how ugly and intrusive the code changes
are to make physical and logical columns distinct. I'd like to think
that some fairly limited changes in and around heap_getattr would do
most of the trick. If we need something as messy as the first-cut
DROP_COLUMN_HACK then I'll look for another way...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-10-14 02:10:36 Re: Re: [HACKERS] My new job
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-14 00:51:27 Re: Small patch to replace 'idle' by 'trans' if transaction is still open