Re: Patch to add support of "IF NOT EXISTS" to others "CREATE" statements

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>
> * Fabrízio de Royes Mello (fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> > Because they maintain user data?
>
> Eh? You mean like the sequence #? Yes, I'd expect 'CREATE OR REPLACE
> SEQUENCE' to want a minvalue or something on a 'replace' case to ensure
> that it doesn't roll backwards unless explicitly asked for. Perhaps
> the same for any non-default parameters as well, though I'd look at the
> other COR cases to see what they do.
>

You mean if we execute 'CREATE OR REPLACE' must we verify the default
values of this statement and compare with the existing ones?

> CREATE OR REPLACE ROLE is actually easier, no? All you'd be updating
> are the various role attributes, I'd think, since only those are
> available at CREATE time today. Any role memberships or ownership
> would be left alone.
>

Think about the statements below:

CREATE ROLE test NOLOGIN;
CREATE OR REPLACE ROLE test;

If we execute the statements above the result should be the role 'test' can
login. Correct?

Regards,

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello