| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, dmitry(at)koterov(dot)ru, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER composite type does not work, but ALTER TABLE which ROWTYPE is used as a type - works fine |
| Date: | 2008-12-08 12:53:48 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150812080453x13276086n7a662cf04b3b4259@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> Dmitry Koterov wrote:
>>> Could you please say, if ALTER TYPE ... ADD COLUMN is planned for a future
>>> PostgreSQL version?
>>
>> It is not currently on the TODO list.
>
> Perhaps we could add it? It's been complained about more than once in
> this space.
Well, new features that have a perfectly acceptable and usable
workaround typically have a fairly low priority of fixing :-)
Since tables are basically types, I'm not sure what the difference is
between tables and composite types (meaning, why do we have the
composite type syntax at all?) I'm not sure if this came up during
the design discussion or not.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2008-12-08 12:56:49 | Re: visibility maps and heap_prune |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-12-08 12:45:53 | Re: new vacuum is slower for small tables |