Re: [PATCH] Alter or rename enum value
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Matthias Kurz <m.kurz@irregular.at>, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Date: 2016-09-06T17:57:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > The opportunity cost here is potential user confusion. The only > closely parallel rename operation we have is ALTER TABLE RENAME COLUMN, > and that doesn't have a column-level IF EXISTS option; it has a > table-level IF EXISTS option. So I think it would be weird and confusing > for ALTER TYPE RENAME VALUE to be different from that. And again, it's > hard to get excited about having these options for RENAME VALUE when no > one has felt a need for them yet in RENAME COLUMN. I'm especially dubious > about IF NOT EXISTS against the destination name, considering that there > isn't *any* variant of RENAME that has an equivalent of that. If it's > really useful, why hasn't that happened? Because Tom Lane keeps voting against every patch to expand IF [ NOT ] EXISTS into a new area? :-) We do have ALTER TABLE [ IF EXISTS ] .. ADD COLUMN [ IF NOT EXISTS ], so if somebody wanted the [ IF NOT EXISTS ] clause to also apply to the RENAME COLUMN case, they'd have a good argument for adding it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Relax transactional restrictions on ALTER TYPE ... ADD VALUE (redux).
- 212fab9926b2 12.0 landed
-
Partially restore comments discussing enum renumbering hazards.
- c9e2e2db5c20 9.4.0 cited
-
Allow adding values to an enum type created in the current transaction.
- 7b90469b7176 9.3.0 cited