Re: Rename sequence bug/feature

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: 'Tom Lane' <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Rename sequence bug/feature
Date: 2002-02-27 08:34:28
Message-ID: FED2B709E3270E4B903EB0175A49BCB1047634@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 27 February 2002 05:20
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Rename sequence bug/feature
>
>
> Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > I noticed in a post recently that it was possible to rename objects
> > other than tables in pg_class using ALTER TABLE RENAME. I've now
> > implemented this in pgAdmin II for views, sequences and indexes.
>
> > Today I've had cause to dump my test database and found a minor
> > problem:
>
> > dumping database "helpdesk"...
> > pg_dump: query to get data of sequence "cat" returned name "dog"
>
> Well, we could either add code to ALTER RENAME to hack the
> sequence name stored in sequences, or we could remove that
> check from pg_dump. I kinda lean to the latter myself; it
> seems pretty useless.

That could potentially break any user apps that (for whatever bizarre
reason) do a select sequence_name of course, though I can't imagine why
anyone would do that. pgAdmin certainly doesn't.

Either fix would be fine for me though...

Thanks, Dave.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karel Zak 2002-02-27 08:52:51 Re: timestamp_part() bug?
Previous Message Janardhana Reddy 2002-02-27 08:22:42 Re: WAL Performance Improvements