On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> If it did so, that would be outside the apparent meaning of the >> command, which is to do nothing if an object of that name exists. >> That's why we've gone with CREATE OR REPLACE instead. > > I think that "fail on existence of an object conflicting with given > definition" is behavior which could be documented and rates fairly > low on my astonishment scale. (I can't speak for anyone else.)
I think CINE should create the object if it does not exist and otherwise do nothing. It might be useful to have some kind of consistency-checking behavior, but it would probably be more useful if decoupled from CINE, and in any case, that's not what "CREATE IF NOT EXISTS" means to me. > I am skeptical that, in the absence of built-in support for checking > the existing object against the supplied definition, people would > generally go any further than Andrew's example. When they did, I'm > skeptical about how often they would get the details exactly right. Bingo. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
