On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
On 6/20/13 11:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > I kind of don't see the point of having IF NOT EXISTS for things that > have OR REPLACE, and am generally in favor of implementing OR REPLACE > rather than IF NOT EXISTS where possible.
I tend to agree.
I agree if is possible to have OR REPLACE then we must do that, but in other hands
I don't see a problem if we have support to both IF NOT EXISTS and OR REPLACE. In
some cases we don't really want to replace the object body if its already exists so
IF NOT EXISTS is useful to don't break the transaction inside a upgrade script.
>> > Btw., I also want REPLACE BUT DO NOT CREATE. > That's a mouthful. What's it good for?
If you run an upgrade SQL script that is supposed to replace, say, a bunch of functions with new versions, you'd want the behavior that it replaces the existing function if it exists, but errors out if it doesn't, because then you're perhaps connected to the wrong database.
It's a marginal feature, and I'm not going to pursue it, but if someone wanted to make the CREATE commands fully featured, there is use for this.
Well, my intention is do that for all CREATE commands.
