From: | Michael Richards <miker(at)scifair(dot)acadiau(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [BUGS] Running queries on inherited tables |
Date: | 1999-09-12 18:41:48 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.10.9909121527330.61970-100000@scifair.acadiau.ca |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-sql |
On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> You have to say "alter table cities*", I believe, otherwise only cities
> is changed. Which is pretty broken --- if inheritance means anything,
> then it ought to mean that the alteration is *inherently* applied to all
> the child tables too, and you shouldn't have the option. In general,
Would this be a simple change in parsing the statement to see if it has
any children and translate the statement accordingly?
> (mostly from Chris Bitmead, I think). ALTER TABLE really needs a
> reimplementation from the ground up, but I dunno when anyone will get
Considering how often Alter table is used, would it be reasonable to rip
out all the alter table code and just have it do a select into;drop;rename
that would be nice in that dropping/adding columns would be easy,
inheritance would (should) be preserved and it's simple.
Of course I wouldn't want to do this on a 5Gb table...
-Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-09-13 00:00:10 | Re: [BUGS] Running queries on inherited tables |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-09-12 17:07:37 | Re: [BUGS] Running queries on inherited tables |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-09-13 00:00:10 | Re: [BUGS] Running queries on inherited tables |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-09-12 17:07:37 | Re: [BUGS] Running queries on inherited tables |