Re: Re: Replace MSSQL by PostgreSQL ?

On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> 100.179370@germanynet.de (Martin Jacobs) writes:
> > If you don't need type 'name' do
> >     DROP TYPE name;
>
> This would be an exceedingly bad idea, since 'name' is used throughout
> the system catalogs.

Ash on my head! You'r right.

>
> It might work to rename the type (eg, "update pg_type set typname =
> 'pgname' where typname = 'name').  Haven't tried that to see what
> sorts of problems it might have.  Would definitely recommend doing
> any experimentation of this sort in a scratch database ;-)
>

I've done such experiment. It does not work, sorry for the
noise. :-(

> ...

I can understand Pruner, it's a bit disappointing to have
'name' as table name blocked by PG internals, and other rather
natural table names too. Is there really no solution?

Martin

--
Dipl-Ing. Martin Jacobs * Windsbach * Germany
Registered Linux User #87175, http://counter.li.org/