Re: pg_dump --binary-upgrade vs. ALTER TYPE ... DROP ATTRIBUTE

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump --binary-upgrade vs. ALTER TYPE ... DROP ATTRIBUTE
Date: 2011-03-31 01:37:56
Message-ID: AANLkTinD26aEHv8p5O3yZ1YBAL9NgpaTRkVR=rEcd0L=@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
>> Perhaps it would be reasonable to extend ALTER TABLE .. [NO]
>> INHERIT to accept a type name as the final argument.  If used in this
>> way, it converts a typed table into a regular table or visca versa.
>
> Why extend ALTER TABLE ... INHERIT?  I would have guessed independent syntax.

I just didn't feel the need to invent something new, but we could if
someone would rather.

>> We could also do it with a direct catalog change, but there are some
>> dependencies that would need to be frobbed, which makes me a bit
>> reluctant to go that way.
>
> Agreed; it's also an independently-useful capability to have.

Yep.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2011-03-31 01:49:18 Re: Problem with pg_upgrade?
Previous Message Noah Misch 2011-03-31 01:32:08 Re: Typed-tables patch broke pg_upgrade