From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Данил Столповских <danil(dot)stolpovskikh(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, o(dot)tselebrovskiy(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, d(dot)frolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru |
Subject: | Re: Allow deleting enumerated values from an existing enumerated data type |
Date: | 2023-09-28 18:35:57 |
Message-ID: | 4755493c-a25c-1332-d2c1-900bd02fb125@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-09-28 Th 10:28, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?UTF-8?B?0JTQsNC90LjQuyDQodGC0L7Qu9C/0L7QstGB0LrQuNGF?= <danil(dot)stolpovskikh(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I would like to offer my patch on the problem of removing values from enums
>> It adds support for expression ALTER TYPE <enum_name> DROP VALUE
>> <value_name>
> This does not fix any of the hard problems that caused us not to
> have such a feature to begin with. Notably, what happens to
> stored data of the enum type if it is a now-deleted value?
>
>
I wonder if we could have a boolean flag in pg_enum, indicating that
setting an enum to that value was forbidden. That wouldn't delete the
value but it wouldn't show up in enum_range and friends. We'd have to
teach pg_dump and pg_upgrade to deal with it, but that shouldn't be too
hard.
Perhaps the command could be something like
ALTER TYPE enum_name DISABLE value;
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-09-28 18:46:22 | Re: Allow deleting enumerated values from an existing enumerated data type |
Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2023-09-28 18:29:21 | Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade failed with error - ERROR: column "a" in child table must be marked NOT NULL |