From: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | A B <gentosaker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Question about object renaming in 9.0 (release note doc.) |
Date: | 2011-01-18 18:03:22 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=U25wD3zdx_7c_jcKtBe3qsAS147W8Uf2nJAfR@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:32 AM, A B <gentosaker(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I read in the release notes for 9.0
>
> "No longer automatically rename indexes and index columns when the
> underlying table columns are renamed (Tom Lane) "
>
> What does this mean?
I think that's referring to this commit:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2009-12/msg00209.php
> If I have a table with a column "x" with an index on the column, and
> change it to y, the name of the index will not change. That's fine,
> but the part "index columns", will the index definition refer to a
> column (x) that no longer exists? I might have gotten this completly
> wrong, so please could some one clarify?
If you rename an indexed column, the index should figure out what happened.
Josh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Smith | 2011-01-18 18:17:46 | ECPG date output depends on database datestyle |
Previous Message | JORGE MALDONADO | 2011-01-18 17:21:12 | Testing backup and restore |