| From: | Casey Deccio <casey(at)deccio(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: alter column type |
| Date: | 2015-06-05 20:06:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAEKtLiQ5b_bBrFbCESO87ukqvDMaSO-ySYBgj2Sp5pNJWFpsJQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:00 PM, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:
> Actually, not too late. My first ALTER is still running, and I still have
> four more to go. Sigh. I had thought of this but wasn't sure how it might
> compare. Thanks for the data point :)
>
>
>
> if all 5 alters' were to the same table, you should have combined them
> into one alter statement
>
Actually, there are six in four different tables.
But... I didn't know I could combine multiple ALTERs into a single
statement. Thanks for the heads up.
Casey
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-06-05 20:40:39 | Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-06-05 20:03:18 | Re: [HACKERS] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 |