Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
>>What about rules/views/functions and who knows what else (domains?)
>>might be dependant on the current type definition?
> Yeah, I was just thinking about that this morning. We probably ought to
> look for dependencies on the table rowtype as well as the individual
> But on the other side of the coin, should we actually reject the ALTER
> if we see a function that uses the rowtype as a parameter or result
> type? Without looking inside the function, we can't really tell if the
> ALTER will break the function or not.
With looking, you can't necessarily. What if I'm building a query with
EXECUTE or for that matter, what if I've written it in C?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gaetano Mendola||Date: 2004-05-07 09:54:38|
|Subject: Re: psql 7.3.4 disagrees with NATURAL CROSS JOIN|
|Previous:||From: Oleg Bartunov||Date: 2004-05-07 07:38:41|
|Subject: Re: Subtle pg_dump problem...|
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Teodor Sigaev||Date: 2004-05-07 11:19:06|
|Subject: pgsql-server/contrib/tsearch2 tsearch.sql.in|
|Previous:||From: Kris Jurka||Date: 2004-05-07 05:28:23|
|Subject: pgsql-server/src/interfaces/jdbc/org/postgresq ...|