Matthias van de Meent writes:
> I don't quite get what the hard problem is that we haven't already
> solved for other systems:
> We already can add additional constraints to domains (e.g. VALUE::int
> <> 4), which (according to docs) scan existing data columns for
> violations.
That's "solved" on
On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 at 22:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
> > On 2023-09-28 Th 14:46, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We went through all these points years ago when the enum feature
> >> was first developed, as I recall. Nobody thought that the ability
> >> to remove an enum value was worth
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 2023-09-28 Th 14:46, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We went through all these points years ago when the enum feature
>> was first developed, as I recall. Nobody thought that the ability
>> to remove an enum value was worth the amount of complexity it'd
>> entail.
> That's quite t
On 10/3/23 17:44, Tom Lane wrote:
Vik Fearing writes:
On 10/2/23 20:07, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
FWIW I'm +1 on this patch,
Thanks.
and with Tom on dropping the "yet". To me it
makes it sound like we intend to implement it soon (fsvo).
I am not fundamentally opposed to it, nor
Vik Fearing writes:
> On 10/2/23 20:07, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> FWIW I'm +1 on this patch,
> Thanks.
>> and with Tom on dropping the "yet". To me it
>> makes it sound like we intend to implement it soon (fsvo).
> I am not fundamentally opposed to it, nor to any other wordsmithing th
On 10/2/23 20:07, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
Vik Fearing writes:
No one except you has said anything about this patch. I think it would
be good to commit it, wordsmithing aside.
FWIW I'm +1 on this patch,
Thanks.
and with Tom on dropping the "yet". To me it
makes it sound like we
Vik Fearing writes:
> On 9/29/23 03:17, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Vik Fearing writes:
>>> On 9/28/23 20:46, Tom Lane wrote:
We went through all these points years ago when the enum feature
was first developed, as I recall. Nobody thought that the ability
to remove an enum value was wort
On 9/29/23 03:17, Tom Lane wrote:
Vik Fearing writes:
On 9/28/23 20:46, Tom Lane wrote:
We went through all these points years ago when the enum feature
was first developed, as I recall. Nobody thought that the ability
to remove an enum value was worth the amount of complexity it'd
entail.
On 2023-09-28 Th 14:46, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
I wonder if we could have a boolean flag in pg_enum, indicating that
setting an enum to that value was forbidden.
Yeah, but that still offers no coherent solution to the problem of
what happens if there's a table that already con
Vik Fearing writes:
> On 9/28/23 20:46, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We went through all these points years ago when the enum feature
>> was first developed, as I recall. Nobody thought that the ability
>> to remove an enum value was worth the amount of complexity it'd
>> entail.
> This issue comes up reg
On 9/28/23 20:46, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
I wonder if we could have a boolean flag in pg_enum, indicating that
setting an enum to that value was forbidden.
Yeah, but that still offers no coherent solution to the problem of
what happens if there's a table that already contains s
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> I wonder if we could have a boolean flag in pg_enum, indicating that
> setting an enum to that value was forbidden.
Yeah, but that still offers no coherent solution to the problem of
what happens if there's a table that already contains such a value.
It doesn't seem terr
On 2023-09-28 Th 10:28, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?0JTQsNC90LjQuyDQodGC0L7Qu9C/0L7QstGB0LrQuNGF?=
writes:
I would like to offer my patch on the problem of removing values from enums
It adds support for expression ALTER TYPE DROP VALUE
This does not fix any of the hard problems that caused
=?UTF-8?B?0JTQsNC90LjQuyDQodGC0L7Qu9C/0L7QstGB0LrQuNGF?=
writes:
> I would like to offer my patch on the problem of removing values from enums
> It adds support for expression ALTER TYPE DROP VALUE
>
This does not fix any of the hard problems that caused us not to
have such a feature to begin
On 9/28/23 14:13, Данил Столповских wrote:
Greetings, everyone!
I would like to offer my patch on the problem of removing values from enums
It adds support for expression ALTER TYPE DROP VALUE
Added:
1. expression in grammar
2. function to drop enum values
3. regression tests
4. documentation
Greetings, everyone!
I would like to offer my patch on the problem of removing values from enums
It adds support for expression ALTER TYPE DROP VALUE
Added:
1. expression in grammar
2. function to drop enum values
3. regression tests
4. documentation
Subject: [PATCH] Add DROP VALUE for ALTER TY
16 matches
Mail list logo
