| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | ash <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re-create dependent views on ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN ... TYPE? |
| Date: | 2014-05-28 18:16:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20140528181648.GC2556@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* ash (ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
> OK, forget functions, I now realize it's not feasible to consider.
I never meant to imply that it was but rather to point out that we might
have users who actually want to get an error when they're changing a
type definition which goes beyond the scope of the explicit action (and
therefore could very well have more side-effects than they realize),
rather than just doing it for them.
> Can we get back to re-defining views at least?
I'm still not convinced you'll be able to do it in a sensible and
reliable way, but you're certainly welcome to continue exploring.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-05-28 18:34:18 | Re: Bison 3.0 updates |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-05-28 18:13:25 | Re: IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA statement |