On 9 February 2014 01:06, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2014-02-09 00:49:31 +0000, Thom Brown wrote: >> # ALTER TABLE test ADD COLUMN a decimal DEFAULT 2.22; >> ALTER TABLE >> >> # ALTER TABLE test ADD COLUMN b json DEFAULT '{"a":[1,2,3],"b":[4,5,6]}'; >> ALTER TABLE >> >> The output generated by those last 2 statements is: >> >> BEGIN 891 >> table "pg_temp_16552": INSERT: id[int4]:1 val[int4]:1 a[numeric]:2.22 >> table "pg_temp_16552": INSERT: id[int4]:2 val[int4]:2 a[numeric]:2.22 >> table "pg_temp_16552": INSERT: id[int4]:3 val[int4]:3 a[numeric]:2.22 >> COMMIT 891 >> BEGIN 892 >> table "pg_temp_16552": INSERT: id[int4]:1 val[int4]:1 a[numeric]:2.22 >> b[json]:{"a":[1,2,3],"b":[4,5,6]} >> table "pg_temp_16552": INSERT: id[int4]:2 val[int4]:2 a[numeric]:2.22 >> b[json]:{"a":[1,2,3],"b":[4,5,6]} >> table "pg_temp_16552": INSERT: id[int4]:3 val[int4]:3 a[numeric]:2.22 >> b[json]:{"a":[1,2,3],"b":[4,5,6]} >> COMMIT 892 >> >> This is showing inserts into the temp table as part of the operation. >> Is that sufficient? > > I think it's a good thing for now. We don't have support for DDL > replication so it's not yet that interesting, but having the new values > allows to safely handle things like DEFAULTs that produce > nondeterministic data. > What do you think?
Okay, I'm just checking. If it's expected behaviour to you, it's good enough for me. -- Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers