| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: DROP COLUMN misbehaviour with multiple inheritance |
| Date: | 2002-09-23 14:01:06 |
| Message-ID: | 21111.1032789666@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
>> It seems to me that DROP ONLY should set attislocal true on each child
>> for which it decrements the inherit count, whether the count reaches
>> zero or not.
> Would it then not produce a situation, which can't be reproduced using
> just CREATEs ? i.e. same column in bot parent (p2.f1) and child (c.f1)
> but _not_ inherited ??
No, because the child will still have attinhcount > 0 until you drop the
last matching parent column. attislocal is independent of the value of
attinhcount (that's why we need two fields).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aaron Held | 2002-09-23 14:31:18 | Re: [SQL] Monitoring a Query |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-23 13:56:59 | Re: ECPG |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-23 14:37:00 | Re: Implementation of LIMIT on DELETE and UPDATE statements (rel to 7.2.1) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-23 13:53:08 | Re: DROP COLUMN misbehaviour with multiple inheritance |