Tom Lane wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes:
> > Disallow changing/dropping default expression of a SERIAL column
> Wasn't this patch rejected?  Your summary is utterly wrong about what
> it does, which makes me wonder whether you reviewed it at all.  One
> would also think that a change in user-visible behavior would merit
> at least some documentation diffs.

Well, it seemed it controlled whether dependency allowed you do drop a
default sequence for a table.  There is something I didn't like about
the patch now that I look at it again --- it uses constants 0-2 when it
should use defines or something clearer.

I thought we had decided that we could not make SERIAL just a macro, and
therefore we have to restrict how we allow modifications.  If someone
wants total control, they should create the DEFAULT manually, but SERIAL
was going to be hard-wired.

Anyway, what is your opinion on this?

Yea, agreed on the documentation issue.  That SERIAL distinction, if
that is the direction we are going, should be documented.

  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to