Re: [HACKERS] ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN
Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
From: Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Date: 2000-02-27T18:17:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
At 08:06 PM 2/27/00 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote: >Does SQL92 syntax allow dropping several columns, i.e. > >ALTER TABLE mytable DROP COLUMN col1,col5,col6; My reading of the syntax says no, it is not allowed. >If it does, it would be very desirable to implement it to avoid the need >for vacuum between each DROP in order to have _only_ 2X disk usage. However, implementing useful extensions to the standard in an upward-compatible way doesn't bother me. I'm not fond of language implementations that are full of gratuitous extensions, but when extensions address real shortcomings in a standard or intersect with a particular implementation in a useful way, then it makes sense to add them. In this case, you're asking for an extension that's useful because Postgres doesn't reclaim storage when a tuple's deleted, but only when the table's vacuumed. Seems fair enough. Whether or not it would be hard to implement is another matter... - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.