Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN
Hiroshi Inoue <inoue@tpf.co.jp>
From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Date: 2000-10-06T03:05:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote: > Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes: > >>>> P.S. I've noticed that get_rte_attribute_name() seems to > >>>> break my implementation. I'm not sure if I could solve it. > >> > >> That would be a problem --- rule dumping depends on that code to > >> produce correct aliases, so making it work is not optional. > > > Your change has no problem if logical==physical attribute > > numbers. > > But if they're not, what do we do? Can we define the order of the > alias-name lists as being one or the other numbering? (Offhand I'd > say it should be logical numbering, but I haven't chased the details.) > If neither of those work, we'll need some more complex datastructure > than a simple list. > I'm not sure if we could keep invariant attribute numbers. Though I've used physical attribute numbers as many as possible in my trial implementation,there's already an exception. I had to use logical attribute numbers for FieldSelect node. Regards. Hiroshi Inoue