Re: Temparary disable constraint - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Adnan DURSUN
Subject Re: Temparary disable constraint
Date
Msg-id BAY106-DAV175F3FAA132599A5BE1908FAAA0@phx.gbl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Temparary disable constraint  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
           Maybe you are right as technically but this behaver causes a lot 
of maintance problem on a database that alot of view and functions that 
depends on a table or a type. I think objects has a property if that object 
is enable or not. We hope this problem can be resolved at 8.4 release.

Best Regards

Adnan DURSUN
ASRIN Bilisim Ltd.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce@momjian.us>
To: "Adnan DURSUN" <a_dursun@hotmail.com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 5:49 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Temparary disable constraint


> Adnan DURSUN wrote:
>>    Hi, Maybe added more further things to TODO list. Enabled /
>>    disabled other objects like view/funtion. imagine a lot of
>>    views that referances a table and i wanna drop a column on this
>>    table that used by these views. Postgres doesnt allow this.
>>    First i must drop these views then drop the column on that
>>    table and then recreate these views.  Can this be resolved
>>    (like oracle does) ?
>
> Not easily, because the view are bound to the object id of the tables
> involved.
>
> --
>  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
>  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
>  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
> 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: What is the motivation of include directive and
Next
From:
Date:
Subject: Scanner/Parser question - what does _P imply?