| From: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO on inherited columns |
| Date: | 2010-01-24 12:13:44 |
| Message-ID: | FCD5B48597C9C131BE1A3488@amenophis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
--On 23. Januar 2010 22:29:23 -0500 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> I don't think this is ready for committer, becauseTom previously
> objected to the approach taken by this patch here, and no one has
> answered his objections:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-01/msg00144.php
>
Ugh, i thought KaiGai's revised patch here
<http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4B41BB04.2070609@ak.jp.nec.com>
was in response to Tom's complaint, since it modifies the method to identify
column origins by recursivly scanning pg_inherits with its current
inhrelid.
> I think someone needs to figure out what the worst-case scenario for
> this is performance-wise and submit a reproducible test case with
> benchmark results. In the meantime, I'm going to set this to Waiting
> on Author.
Makes sense.
--
Thanks
Bernd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-24 12:45:18 | Re: further explain changes |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2010-01-24 11:22:55 | Re: further explain changes |