Tom, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > >> So maybe something like > >> > >> All the forms of ALTER TABLE that act on a single table, > >> except RENAME and SET SCHEMA, can be combined into a > >> list of multiple alterations to be applied together. > > > Committed and back-patch'd that way. > > BTW, so far as the HEAD version of this patch goes, I notice that > ATTACH PARTITION and DETACH PARTITION were recently added to the > list of exceptions. But they're not exceptions according to this > wording: they act on more than one table (the parent and the > partition), no? So we could simplify the sentence some more by > removing them again.
I had considered removing those but thought that some users might think that they're only "altering" one table and therefore felt it made sense to keep those explicitly listed. I don't hold that position very strongly, but wanted to explain my thinking there. If you still feel it'd be better to keep it simple rather than be explicit for those cases then I'll change it. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature