On Dec 12, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Roy Lyseng wrote:
Sheeri,
Sheeri K. Cabral wrote:
Personally, I use ALTER TABLE for everything I can . . . I don't
use CREATE INDEX, DROP INDEX, RENAME TABLE, etc. Maybe for SQL
standard compliance?
AFAIK, the SQL standard has no commands for renaming objects.
And indexes are not defined by the standard - they are only part of
the physical schema and do not provide any information to the
logical schema.
Cool, this is good to know, Roy, thx. So, I guess this is going to
come down to the following decision:
Is the "ease of use" of the RENAME TABLE (and in future, RENAME
SCHEMA) command worth the current different code paths and complexity?
I would say that depends on what Drizzle is trying to accomplish.
Simplifying things makes sense, but I'll be honest that I use RENAME
TABLE over ALTER and much prefer it (although I use ALTER for
everything else *shrug*). If catering to lazy people such as myself
significantly complicates the codebase, I'd say do without. But it
sounds like RENAME TABLE at least is, more or less, synonymous with
ALTER TBALE ... RENAME ... And, if that is the case, I'd say leave it
be. Either way, I don't run this command very often and there similar
methods of accomplishing the same result. So, at the end of the day,
I'd call this another 'Low Hanging Fruit' thing.
RENAME SCHEMA, though seems more complicated. I think it would be
convenient, but since I can't speak to the complexity of it, I can't
comment on it all that much.
Tim S.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
