Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3A709FB739 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:40:48 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 38266-04 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:40:45 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from fetter.org (start.fetter.org [66.92.188.65]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2E79FB6EE for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:40:45 -0300 (ADT) Received: by fetter.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 287D4FBC6E0; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:40:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:40:44 -0700 From: David Fetter To: Tom Lane Cc: Neil Conway , Euler Taveira de Oliveira , Susanne Ebrecht , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: rename of a view Message-ID: <20070630054043.GR7636@fetter.org> References: <46839C05.7050307@miracee.de> <3450.1183040211@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20070629183219.GO7636@fetter.org> <20070630001653.GQ7636@fetter.org> <4685D8C8.2070808@timbira.com> <12776.1183177571@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1183181585.20942.1.camel@goldbach> <15084.1183181782@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15084.1183181782@sss.pgh.pa.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200706/36 X-Sequence-Number: 4325 On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:36:22AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Neil Conway writes: > > On Sat, 2007-30-06 at 00:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> There is exactly 0 chance of that happening, because it's always > >> worked historically. > > > Agreed, but I think the patch should disallow ALTER VIEW ... > > RENAME on a non-view, and ALTER SEQUENCE ... RENAME on a > > non-sequence. > > No objection to that; it'd square with our treatment of TYPE and > DOMAIN commands. What I'm wondering though is whether the whole > patch has a reason to live at all, as compared to documenting > someplace more prominent than now that ALTER TABLE works on views & > sequences. How could it be prominent short of documentation of the thing people would expect, which is ALTER [SEQUENCE | VIEW] RENAME TO ... ? I suppose we could document that they're actually done by ALTER TABLE, but that just seems like a huge POLA violation, along with assuming way too much knowledge of how sequences and views are implemented. Cheers, D -- David Fetter http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote! Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate