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 :-(


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to