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

Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO on inherited columns

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Cc: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO on inherited columns
Date: 2010-01-27 20:42:45
Message-ID: 603c8f071001271242k2e96c599k624adf87b36d4270@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:17 AM, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
> (2010/01/27 23:29), Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> 2010/1/27 KaiGai Kohei<kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
>>>
>>> The attached patch is revised one based on the V3 approach.
>>> The only difference from V3 is that it also applies checks on the
>>> AT_AlterColumnType option, not only renameatt().
>>
>> I think I was clear about what the next step was for this patch in my
>> previous email, but let me try again.
>>
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-01/msg02407.php
>>
>> See also Tom's comments here:
>>
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-01/msg00110.php
>>
>> I don't believe that either Tom or I are prepared to commit a patch
>> based on this approach, at least not unless someone makes an attempt
>> to do it the other way and finds an even more serious problem.  If
>> you're not interested in rewriting the patch along the lines Tom
>> suggested, then we should just mark this as Returned with Feedback and
>> move on.
>
> The V3/V5 patch was the rewritten one based on the Tom's comment, as is.
> It counts the expected inhcount at the first find_all_inheritors() time
> at once, and it compares the pg_attribute.attinhcount.
> (In actually, find_all_inheritors() does not have a capability to count
> the number of merged from a common origin, so I newly defined the
> find_all_inheritors_with_inhcount().)
>
> Am I missing something?

Err... I'm not sure.  I thought I understood what the different
versions of this patch were doing, but apparently I'm all confused.
I'll take another look at this.

Bernd (or anyone), feel free to take a look in parallel.  More eyes
would be helpful...

...Robert

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bernd HelmleDate: 2010-01-27 21:03:51
Subject: Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO on inherited columns
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-01-27 20:37:37
Subject: Re: xpath improvement suggestion

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