David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 06:25:09PM +0400, ash wrote: >> Hi Hackers, >> >> This came up recently on general list (and I've just hit the same issue >> today): >> >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cab7npqtlmmn1ltb5we0v0do57ip0u73ykwzbzytaxdf1caw...@mail.gmail.com >> >> Why couldn't postgres re-create the dependent views automatically? I >> mean it knows which views depend on the altered column and keeps the >> view definition, no? > > Also worth considering: functions which take any part of the view as a > parameter.
Sorry, I don't get it: do you suggest we should re-create dependent functions too? I don't think that's feasible, but there is certainly a use case for silently re-defining the views together with alteration of the joined table. -- Alex -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
