Re: alter + preserving dependencies
От | Dimitri Fontaine |
---|---|
Тема | Re: alter + preserving dependencies |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1A1CA5D7-C727-41BB-A5D6-8D143E18ACE3@hi-media.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: alter + preserving dependencies (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: alter + preserving dependencies
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Le 6 mai 08 à 19:44, Tom Lane a écrit : > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >> Josh Berkus wrote: >>> I don't follow you. I can currently add a column, without breaking >>> either foriegn keys or inheritance. What's the problem? > >> not for a view at least. > > Yeah, the restrictions on replacing a view definition date from before > we had any fancy ALTER TABLE stuff. They could probably use a re- > visit. Could we add some other VIEWs features while revisiting? We had some question on #postgresqlfr about updatable views and the rewrite rule system, which I could chat about with Jan Wieck on #postgresql too. The problem we had was related to DEFAULT versus NULL handling from an insert or update RULE and how to avoid having an absent column rewritten as NULL instead of DEFAULT. Could we consider ALTER VIEW ALTER COLUMN ... SET DEFAULT ...;? Bonus question: why is the rewriter unable to distinguish whether NULL comes from the user or comes from the column was not part of the user query? Regards, - -- dim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkghQRIACgkQlBXRlnbh1bnWAQCeNF4RJwWLcGmmPPE8eUGn3/Yi 6NEAn1YOQ3Bz7L+tD01rQqqeyNt7djwA =MXD8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: