| From: | "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Svetlana Derevyanko <s(dot)derevyanko(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Optional OR REPLACE in CREATE OPERATOR statement |
| Date: | 2023-03-22 03:29:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HMi9=hVgK39n-pak_4cR__zZv1FM5H2aWsNp6hGui60SQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 11:29, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> No, that's not acceptable. CREATE OR REPLACE should always produce
> exactly the same final state of the object, but in this case we cannot
> change the underlying function if the operator already exists.
It sounds like this patch isn't the direction to go in. I don't know
if IF NOT EXISTS is better but that design discussion should probably
happen after this commitfest.
I'm sorry but I guess I'll mark this patch Rejected.
--
Gregory Stark
As Commitfest Manager
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2023-03-22 03:30:11 | RE: Allow logical replication to copy tables in binary format |
| Previous Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2023-03-22 03:19:11 | RE: Question: Do we have a rule to use "PostgreSQL" and "<productname>PostgreSQL</productname>" separately? |