Re: rename of a view - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: rename of a view
Date
Msg-id 15084.1183181782@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: rename of a view  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Responses Re: rename of a view  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Re: rename of a view  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
List pgsql-docs
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> On Sat, 2007-30-06 at 00:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There is exactly 0 chance of that happening, because it's always worked
>> historically.

> Agreed, but I think the patch should disallow ALTER VIEW ... RENAME on a
> non-view, and ALTER SEQUENCE ... RENAME on a non-sequence.

No objection to that; it'd square with our treatment of TYPE and DOMAIN
commands.  What I'm wondering though is whether the whole patch has
a reason to live at all, as compared to documenting someplace more
prominent than now that ALTER TABLE works on views & sequences.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: rename of a view
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: rename of a view