Re: WIP: Enhanced ALTER OPERATOR - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WIP: Enhanced ALTER OPERATOR
Date
Msg-id 15366.1432827832@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: Enhanced ALTER OPERATOR  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: WIP: Enhanced ALTER OPERATOR
List pgsql-hackers
Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> writes:
> Could we address both this problems by denying changing existing
> commutators and negator? ISTM that setting absent commutator and negator is
> quite enough for ALTER OPERATOR. User extensions could need setting of
> commutator and negator because they could add new operators which don't
> exist before. But it's rather uncommon to unset or change commutator or
> negator.

Note that this functionality is already covered, in that you can specify
the commutator/negator linkage when you create the second operator.
I'm not particularly convinced that we need to have it in ALTER OPERATOR.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Christoph Berg
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade resets timeline to 1
Next
From: Abhijit Menon-Sen
Date:
Subject: [PATCH] readlink missing nul-termination in pg_rewind