Re: Possible enhancement : replace view ?

Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 04:08, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
> 
>>Dear all,
>>
> 
> ...
> 
> 
>>Of course, I am aware that view definitions aren't just stored, but that 
>>  a lot of rewriting is involved before storing the actual execution 
>>plan.    Modifying a view definition would entail re-processing of other 
>>view definitions. But so is the case with the modification of a table ...
>>
>>What do you think ?
> 
> 
> I'm trying to propose a scenario where
> 
> 1. The SELECT clause defining the view is preserved
> 
> 2. DROP of undrlying table/column will _not_ drop the view, but just
> mark it dirty
> 
> 3. Using the view checks for the dirty flag and if it is set tries to
> recreate the view from its plaintext definition.

I might be dense, but why not try to recreate it directly after the 
table/column modification ?

> ---------------
> Hannu
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
> 
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html