Wow, I learn a lot about views now
Sorry for my confusion. You are right, my reasoning is very limited.
Thanks Heikki , Tom and Reece by yours answers.
Tom Lane wrote:
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Luiz K. Matsumura wrote:
But, with the 'replace' command, this isn't implicit ?
If they found a view, replace the existing view with the new one (on the
other words, drop and create again?)
Replacing is not exactly the same thing as dropping and recreating it.
If the view has dependencies, you can't drop it without dropping the
dependent objects first, and likewise you can't change its datatypes
because it would affect the dependent objects as well (hence the
limitation on CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW).
Right. And the reason this appears to be a data type change is that
"NULL" is not length-constrained, so the type computed for the first
UNION's output is just bpchar (ie, unconstrained-length character)
rather than character(3) which is what you get in the second case.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
--
Luiz K. Matsumura
Plan IT Tecnologia Informática Ltda.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
