Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCIAy-001q9C-0J for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:22:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCIAw-007JWp-1Z for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:22:07 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCIAw-007JWh-0m for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:22:07 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1wCIAv-00000000qm5-0RWa for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:22:06 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 63DEM2YG823736; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 10:22:02 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: bsislow@accertify.com cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #19455: ALTER TABLE RENAME will rename a sequence In-reply-to: <19455-8dabf39f306c3ccc@postgresql.org> References: <19455-8dabf39f306c3ccc@postgresql.org> Comments: In-reply-to PG Bug reporting form message dated "Mon, 13 Apr 2026 12:48:35 -0000" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <823734.1776090122.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 10:22:02 -0400 Message-ID: <823735.1776090122@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk PG Bug reporting form writes: > Is this expected behavior? ALTER TABLE RENAME will rename a sequence. Yes, it is. It'll work on views and (most?) other kinds of relations too. To some extent this is a hangover from before we had the more specialized variants. But it can be handy to not worry too much about just what kind of relation you're renaming, and tightening that up would likely break some applications, so we haven't. regards, tom lane