Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: rename of a view

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Susanne Ebrecht <miracee(at)miracee(dot)de>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: rename of a view
Date: 2007-06-30 05:36:22
Message-ID: 15084.1183181782@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-patches
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, 2007-30-06 at 00:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There is exactly 0 chance of that happening, because it's always worked
>> historically.

> Agreed, but I think the patch should disallow ALTER VIEW ... RENAME on a
> non-view, and ALTER SEQUENCE ... RENAME on a non-sequence.

No objection to that; it'd square with our treatment of TYPE and DOMAIN
commands.  What I'm wondering though is whether the whole patch has
a reason to live at all, as compared to documenting someplace more
prominent than now that ALTER TABLE works on views & sequences.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2007-06-30 05:40:44
Subject: Re: rename of a view
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2007-06-30 05:33:05
Subject: Re: rename of a view

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2007-06-30 05:40:44
Subject: Re: rename of a view
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2007-06-30 05:33:05
Subject: Re: rename of a view

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group