| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com, Matthias Kurz <m(dot)kurz(at)irregular(dot)at>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Alter or rename enum value |
| Date: | 2016-09-11 14:34:57 |
| Message-ID: | 23103.1473604497@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> writes:
> On 9/8/16 4:55 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote:
>> The main problem that has been discussed before was the indexes. One
>> way is to tackle with it is to reindex all the tables after the
>> operation. Currently we are doing it when the datatype of indexed
>> columns change. So it should be possible, but very expensive.
> Why not just disallow dropping a value that's still in use? That's
> certainly what I would prefer to happen by default...
Even ignoring the hidden-values-in-indexes problem, how would you
discover that it's still in use? Not to mention preventing new
insertions after you look?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-11 15:26:15 | Re: Use nanosleep() for pg_usleep() on Unix/Linux? |
| Previous Message | Christian Convey | 2016-09-11 14:26:25 | Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres |