RE: [HACKERS] Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN
Date: 2000-02-28 02:00:35
Message-ID: 000601bf818f$9a2e5f60$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
>
> [Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> >
> > > You can exclusively lock the table, then do a heap_getnext() scan over
> > > the entire table, remove the dropped column, do a
> heap_insert(), then a
> > > heap_delete() on the current tuple,
> >
> > Wow, that almost seems to easy to be true. I never thought that having
> > tuples of different structures in the table at the same time would be
> > possible. If so then I don't see a reason why this would be too hard to
> > do.
>
> If the transaction is not committed, I don't think anything actually
> reads the tuple columns, so you are safe.
>

Hmm,tuples of multiple version in a table ?
This is neither clean nor easy for me.
There's no such stuff which takes the case into account,AFAIK.

Seems no one but me object to it. I'm tired of this issue and it's
painful for me to continue discussion further in my poor English.
I may be able to provide another implementation on trial and it
may be easier than only objecting to your proposal.
Is it OK ?

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vince Vielhaber 2000-02-28 02:04:29 Re: [HACKERS] Web page on bug reports
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-02-28 00:18:22 Re: [HACKERS] update_pg_pwd trigger does not work very well