| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, April Lorenzen <outboundindex(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: error-free disabling of individual child partition |
| Date: | 2006-05-23 15:31:05 |
| Message-ID: | 8849.1148398265@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Do we need the ALTER keyword? That isn't used anywhere apart from
> manipulating columns. i.e.
> ALTER TABLE childN INHERITS DROP old_parent;
> ALTER TABLE childN INHERITS ADD new_parent;
At that point it seems like it'd read more naturally the other way
round:
ALTER TABLE childN DROP INHERITS old_parent;
ALTER TABLE childN ADD INHERITS new_parent;
although I'm not sure if this would create a parser conflict against
ADD/DROP COLUMN.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Hamill | 2006-05-23 15:54:22 | Re: Further reduction of bufmgr lock contention |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-05-23 15:26:58 | Re: error-free disabling of individual child partition |