| From: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE modifications |
| Date: | 2003-11-13 21:42:30 |
| Message-ID: | 1068759749.32543.66.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
-- moved to -hackers
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 11:35, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Rod Taylor kirjutas N, 13.11.2003 kell 16:59:
> >
> > Can you please suggest a better term to use in place of TRANSFORM?
> > Perhaps UPDATE WITH?
>
> or perhaps USING, based loosely on our use of USING in CREATE INDEX ?
USING sounds reasonable to me. Peter?
To those not on -patches, Peter is unhappy with the TRANSFORM clause in:
ALTER TABLE tab ALTER COLUMN col TRANSFORM expression;
The reasoning is that TRANSFORM in the spec means something different
than our use. We're attempting to come up with a replacement term.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2003-11-13 21:54:32 | Re: cvs head? initdb? |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2003-11-13 21:41:42 | Re: cvs head? initdb? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-11-13 22:56:06 | New List |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2003-11-13 16:35:51 | Re: ALTER TABLE modifications |