Re: DROP COLUMN
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: DROP COLUMN |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D85C66DA59BA044EB96AB9683819CF6101513E@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | DROP COLUMN (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp] > Sent: 17 July 2002 05:12 > To: Bruce Momjian > Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne; Tom Lane; Rod Taylor; > PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DROP COLUMN > > > > >From my perspective, when client coders like Dave Page and > others say > > they would prefer the flag to the negative attno's, I don't have to > > understand. I just take their word for it. > > do they really love to check attisdropped everywhere ? > Isn't it the opposite of the encapsulation ? > I don't understand why we would do nothing for clients. In pgAdmin's case, this involves one test (maybe 3 lines of code), because all access to column info is made through one class. The reason I voted for attisdropped is that the negative attnum's are assumed by pgAdmin to be 'system columns', not 'any column that doesn't belong to the user'. Coding around a change like that - whilst not necessarily harder - would certainly be messier. Regards, Dave.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: