Re: Re-create dependent views on ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN ... TYPE?
Alex Shulgin <ash@commandprompt.com>
From: ash <ash@commandprompt.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
"pgsql-hackers\@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-06-02T15:18:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:52 AM, ash <ash@commandprompt.com> wrote: >>> Should this fail, the user will have to work around it, but most of the >>> time it could just work. > >> You're either missing or choosing to ignore the point that I'm making, >> which is that we *don't have* the text form of the view anywhere. > > Even if we did, I don't think it'd affect this decision. > > The real problem in my mind is one of user expectations. If the database > silently does something behind your back, people expect that that action > will be *right* and they don't have to worry about it. I don't think > that automatically reparsing views has much chance of clearing that bar. > In much simpler, non-extensible SQL systems it could probably work, but > for better or worse Postgres has gone all-in on datatype extensibility. Alright, I think I can let it go now. It's just that the behavior was very counter-intuitive to me (and I guess a lot others) at first. Thanks all for your time and in-depth explanation! -- Alex
Commits
-
Allow CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW to add columns to the _end_ of the view.
- ff1ea2173a92 8.4.0 cited