Re: ALTER TABLE x ALTER COLUMN y TYPE z
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ALTER TABLE x ALTER COLUMN y TYPE z |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19259.1143058484@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ALTER TABLE x ALTER COLUMN y TYPE z ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Ответы |
Re: ALTER TABLE x ALTER COLUMN y TYPE z
|
Список | pgsql-docs |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes: > The user comment's recommended technique includes this line: > ALTER TABLE tab DROP COLUMN temp_name; > Would this cause a table rewrite? (Not a rhetorical question. I > really don't know.) No, it wouldn't. The UPDATE is the only part that modifies the table contents. However, the arguments Robert pointed to had to do with concurrent access to the table, and somehow I am not seeing the use-case for ALTER COLUMN TYPE on a table that's being actively used by other clients. It seems unlikely that you could do that without needing to also update your client software. I'd be a tad worried about stale-cached-plan problems too, in current PG releases. Finally, since the first ALTER will take an exclusive lock that won't be released until COMMIT, this approach doesn't avoid the problem of holding exclusive lock for a long time. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: