Horton

Re: Rearranging ALTER TABLE to avoid multi-operations bugs

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-05-29T20:50:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 6:24 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Anybody have thoughts about a different way to approach it?

I mean, in an ideal world, I think we'd never call back out to
ProcessUtility() from within AlterTable().  That seems like a pretty
clear layering violation.  I assume the reason we've never tried to do
better is a lack of round tuits and/or sufficient motivation.

In terms of what we'd do instead, I suppose we'd try to move as much
as possible inside the ALTER TABLE framework proper and have
everything call into that.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Clarify behavior of adding and altering a column in same ALTER command.

  2. Restructure ALTER TABLE execution to fix assorted bugs.

  3. doc: Add best practises section to partitioning docs

  4. Allow on-the-fly capture of DDL event details