Manuel Rigger <rigger.manuel@gmail.com> writes:
> Consider the test case below:
> CREATE TABLE t0(c0 boolean);
> CREATE TABLE t1(c0 boolean);
> CREATE TABLE t2(c0 boolean) INHERITS(t0, t1);
> ALTER TABLE t0 ALTER c0 TYPE TEXT;
> UPDATE t1 SET c0 = TRUE; -- ERROR: attribute "c0" of relation "t2"
> does not match parent's type
> The ALTER TABLE leaves t1 behind in an unusable state, which is
> somewhat unexpected. I would expect that either the ALTER TABLE fails
> unless also t1 is explicitly updated, or that the ALTER TABLE updates
> the column in t1. Updating the other tables does not cause a problem:
> UPDATE t2 SET c0 = TRUE; -- no error
> UPDATE t0 SET c0 = 'asdf'; -- no error
> Is this behavior intended?
Hm. I would say that the ALTER COLUMN TYPE operation should have thrown
an error instead of trying to change the type of a multiply-inherited
column. As you say, no good can come of that.
Given such a restriction, there would be no way to change c0's type while
the multi-inheritance situation exists. You'd have to disinherit t2 from
one parent or the other, change the type in both parents, and then
re-inherit from the removed parent. That is possible, and given the lack
of prior complaints, it seems like it'd be a sufficient answer to anyone
who needs to do it.
regards, tom lane
