| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Non-colliding auto generated names |
| Date: | 2003-03-06 02:08:59 |
| Message-ID: | 3096.1046916539@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> I think we should stick with the existing naming convention.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Non-colliding?
No; see above.
> Otherwise, it'd be ludicrous to fail a table rename because
> a sequence with the new name already exists...
Why? We already rename the table's rowtype, ergo you can fail a table
rename because there is a conflicting datatype name. I don't see
anything much wrong with failing a table or column rename because there
is a conflicting sequence name. The whole point here is to have a
non-surprising mapping between the names of serial columns and the names
of their associated sequences.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | cbbrowne | 2003-03-06 02:10:33 | Re: XML ouput for psql |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-03-06 02:04:58 | Re: [PATCHES] Non-colliding auto generated names |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | cbbrowne | 2003-03-06 02:10:33 | Re: XML ouput for psql |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-03-06 02:04:58 | Re: [PATCHES] Non-colliding auto generated names |