Re: [BUGS] Altering a table with a rowtype column

Not a bad idea. I'd need to convert existing data, but it'd be an excuse
to try out hstore. ^_^

Mike
* <Mike(dot)Blackwell(at)rrd(dot)com>*

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:08, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On a practical level, the error blocks nothing -- you can bypass it
> > trivially. It's just an annoyance that prevents things that users
> > would like to be able to do with table row types. So I'd argue to
> > remove the check, although I can kinda see the argument that it's not
> > a bug unless the check was recently introduced so that it broke older
> > code.
>
> The behavior hasn't changed since at least as far back as 8.1, so
> you're correct (once again) -- not a bug. I'm really surprised I
> haven't already bumped into this. I usually don't mix
> tables-as-storage with tables-as-composites though.
>
> Mike, on 9.1, you'll probably get more mileage out of using the hstore
> type for row storage if you want to do auditing in that style.
>
> merlin
>