Neil Conway wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-07 at 23:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Er, was this on the agenda for 8.3? > > Well, it seemed fairly harmless to me (no behavioral changes and very > little new code, just syntax), so I didn't see a compelling reason to > delay applying it for a few months. But I can revert it if you'd prefer.
hmm so now we have ALTER VIEW/SEQUENCE commands that can do a bit but not all of what ALTER TABLE can do (renaming columns of a VIEW or changing the owner for example). I agree in principle that having those functionality in ALTER VIEW/SEQUENCE is a good idea but only bringing in a bit of the required functionality which still does not solve the "uhm why do I need ALTER TABLE to manipulate a VIEW" months after the feature freeze sounds a bit wrong to me :-( Stefan ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
