| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SET NULL / SET NOT NULL |
| Date: | 2002-03-22 05:52:50 |
| Message-ID: | 29097.1016776370@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Say in the future we want to support changing column type as well. How
> would we work that in?
> ALTER TABLE blah ALTER COLUMN col SET int4; ??????
Seems one keyword shy of a load; I'd prefer
ALTER TABLE blah ALTER COLUMN col SET TYPE int4;
Otherwise, every keyword that might appear after SET will have to be
fully reserved (else it couldn't be distinguished from a type name).
I like the "SET NULL"/"SET NOT NULL" variant better than SET/DROP, even
though "SET NULL" is perhaps open to misinterpretation. "DROP NOT NULL"
seems just as confusing for anyone who's not read the documentation :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-03-22 06:01:21 | Re: Where to get official SQL spec (was Re: Domain Support) |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-03-22 05:39:45 | Re: SET NULL / SET NOT NULL |