Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ?
От | Don Baccus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3.0.1.32.20000221102715.010ada40@mail.pacifier.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ? (Ed Loehr <eloehr@austin.rr.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ?
Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
At 12:11 PM 2/21/00 -0600, Ed Loehr wrote: >Don Baccus wrote: >> >> Even pg_dump works, though I had to modify a couple of views in order >> to get them reload correctly. > >Don, could you elaborate on what you had to do to make your views >reload correctly? Good timing - I was about to post on this subject anyway. I was able to fix my views by changing: create view foo as select * from bar; to: ...select * from bar bar; In other words, an explicit declaration of the range table name (is that the right term?P my mind's numb from porting queries all weekend) leads to a rule that will reload. I figured this out because there are some fairly complex views in this datamodel, which use explicit names to avoid ambiguous column references. The standard actually says that a from clause like "from bar" implicitly declares "bar" for you, i.e. is exactly equivalent to "from bar bar". If Postgres name scoping - which I know is not standard-compliant in the JOIN syntax case - is close enough so that a transformation of "from bar" to "from bar bar" could be done in the parser without breaking existing code, then a lot more views could be successfully be dumped and reloaded. Would all views dump/reload, or are there other problems I don't know about? I'm not in a position to judge, I've been too deeply embedded in getting this toolkit ready for release (our first will be Wednesday) to worry about the general case. However, I do know that doing the transformation by hand in the datamodel source has fixed the problem for me. Does anyone know if there are other problems? Even if there are, a simple transformation such as I describe would help - IF it didn't break existing code. If it would break existing code, then it is due to non-compliance with the standard so perhaps wouldn't be such a terrible thing, either. I'm not really in a position to judge. What do folks think? - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Serviceand other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: