Horton

Re: [PATCH] Alter or rename enum value

Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: ilmari@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker )
To: emre@hasegeli.com
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Matthias Kurz <m.kurz@irregular.at>, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Date: 2016-09-07T11:17:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com> writes:

>> Bottom line here is that I'd rather commit ALTER TYPE RENAME VALUE with
>> no EXISTS features and then see it accrete those features together with
>> other types of RENAME, when and if there's a will to make that happen.
>
> This sounds like a good conclusion to me.

Works for me. I mainly added the IF [NOT] EXISTS support to be
consistent with ADD VALUE, and because I like idempotency, but I'm not
married to it.

Here is version 6 of the patch, which just adds RENAME VALUE with no IF
[NOT] EXISTS, rebased onto current master (particularly the
transactional ADD VALUE patch).

Commits

  1. Relax transactional restrictions on ALTER TYPE ... ADD VALUE (redux).

  2. Partially restore comments discussing enum renumbering hazards.

  3. Allow adding values to an enum type created in the current transaction.