On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 8:00 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 6:34 AM Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 6:56 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> > >> Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> writes: > >> > ... I found that the command tag of > >> > ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW RENAME COLUMN is "ALTER TABLE", not "ALTER > VIEW". > >> > >> > =# ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW hoge RENAME COLUMN j TO x; > >> > ALTER TABLE > >> > >> > Is this intentional? Or bug? > >> > >> Seems like an oversight. > > Thanks for the check! > > > The same issue is with ALTER FOREIGN TABLE > > Yes. > > > Attached patch fixes that for ALTER VIEW , ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW and > ALTER FOREIGN TABLE > > You introduced subtype in your patch, but I think it's better and simpler > to just give relationType to AlterObjectTypeCommandTag() > if renaming the columns (i.e., renameType = OBJECT_COLUMN). > > That's works perfectly along with future oversight about the command tag. > To avoid this kind of oversight about command tag, I'd like to add > regression > tests to make sure that SQL returns valid and correct command tag. > But currently there seems no mechanism for such test, in regression > test. Right?? > Do we really need a regression test cases for such small oversights? > Maybe we will need that mechanism. > > Regards, > > -- > Fujii Masao > -- Ibrar Ahmed
