On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Vik Reykja <vikrey...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I took my first stab at hacking the sources to fix the bug reported here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2012-01/msg00152.php
> It's such a simple patch but it took me several hours with Google and IRC
> and I'm sure I did many things wrong.  It seems to work as advertised,
> though, so I'm submitting it.
> I suppose since I have now submitted a patch, it is my moral obligation to
> review at least one.  I'm not sure how helpful I'll be, but I'll go bite the
> bullet and sign myself up anyway.

I'm not sure that an error message that is accurate but slightly less
clear than you'd like qualifies as a bug, but I agree that it would
probably be worth improving, and I also agree with the general
approach you've taken here.  However, I think we ought to handle
renaming a column symmetrically to adding one.  So here's a revised
version of your patch that does that.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Attachment: systemcolumn-v2.patch
Description: Binary data

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to