| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER command reworks |
| Date: | 2013-01-21 15:12:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20130121151215.GB4526@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane escribió:
> Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> writes:
> > About ALTER FUNCTION towards aggregate function, why we should raise
> > an error strictly?
>
> I agree we probably shouldn't --- traditionally we have allowed that,
> AFAIR, so changing it would break existing applications for little
> benefit.
Okay, I have pushed the version I posted last week.
> Similarly, you should not be throwing error when ALTER TABLE is applied
> to a view, sequence, etc, and the command would otherwise be sensible.
As far as ALTER some-obj RENAME goes, this is already working, so I
haven't changed anything.
Thanks,
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Phil Sorber | 2013-01-21 15:54:41 | Re: pg_ctl idempotent option |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-01-21 15:11:55 | Re: pg_dump transaction's read-only mode |