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

Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, "Dickson S(dot) Guedes" <listas(at)guedesoft(dot)net>, fabriziomello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS
Date: 2012-10-02 19:48:33
Message-ID: 25156.1349207313@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Excerpts from David E. Wheeler's message of mar oct 02 16:16:37 -0300 2012:
>> On Oct 2, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> create schema if not exists foo create table first (a int);
>>> create schema if not exists foo create table second (a int);
>>>
>>> As far as I can see, with the patch as it currently stands, you would
>>> end up with only table "first" in the schema, which seems very
>>> surprising to me.

>> Yeah, I think the second should die. CINE should only work if there are no other objects created as part of the statement, IMHO.

> Well, if that's the rationale then you end up with no schema foo at all
> (i.e. both die), which seems even more surprising (though I admit it has
> the advantage of being a simple rule to document.)

I think we should just disallow putting any contained objects in the
statement when IF NOT EXISTS is used.  It's simple to understand, simple
to document and implement, and I think it covers all the sane use-cases
anyway.

			regards, tom lane


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2012-10-02 19:52:15
Subject: Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2012-10-02 19:37:30
Subject: Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS

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