From: | craigp <craigp98072(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | newbie: renaming sequences task |
Date: | 2008-03-02 10:36:33 |
Message-ID: | 101551.29641.qm@web53906.mail.re2.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi -
I was perusing the todo list to see some easy items that I might help out on (and get up to speed on postgres hacking)... one of them (with %) seems to lead to another:
o %Have ALTER TABLE RENAME rename SERIAL sequence names
o Have ALTER SEQUENCE RENAME rename the sequence name stored in the sequence table
and perhaps this one as well:
Consider placing all sequences in a single table, or create a system view
I read through the mailing list links (they seem to culminate with these two):
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-09/msg00141.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-10/msg00038.php
But I'm left a bit confused on what, if anything, can or should be done. Maybe this isn't the best item to start with? If I had some more direction, it might be straightforward enough.
One thing I did notice: sequence names are stored in both pg_type.typname and pg_class.relkind. I presume both tables would need to be updated, unless we remove the redundancy? Why can they not be updated within a single transaction (easily)? What sort of restructuring would be needed to separate out the transactional vs non-transactional aspects?
thanks!
--craig
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | craigp | 2008-03-02 10:46:24 | Re: newbie: renaming sequences task |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-03-02 00:51:01 | Re: "could not open relation 1663/16384/16584: No such file or directory" in a specific combination of transactions with temp tables |