> I was unaware that other folks had pointed to the copy/rename approach
> earlier as being a possible means of implementation. I thought you'd
> pulled that one out of your hat. Still, more advance discussion would've
> perhaps led to other approaches to investigate, just as discussion
> now is doing.
>
> I'm going to be blunt: implementation of "drop column" by doing a copy/rename
> isn't something one expects of a competitive commercial-quality RDBMS.
>
> Perhaps it's the best we can expect of Postgres, though. If so, so be it.
Maybe that is true. Having phantom column all over the code is going to
be a mess, and hardly worth it considering how many developers there are
and how many _big_ items still have to be done.
Messing up code for one feature is rarely worth it.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
