Hi -
I was perusing the todo list to see some easy items that I might help out on (and get up to speed on postgres
hacking)...one of them (with %) seems to lead to another:
o %Have ALTER TABLE RENAME rename SERIAL sequence names o Have ALTER SEQUENCE RENAME rename the sequence name
storedin the sequence table
and perhaps this one as well:
Consider placing all sequences in a single table, or create a system view
I read through the mailing list links (they seem to culminate with these two):
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-09/msg00141.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-10/msg00038.php
But I'm left a bit confused on what, if anything, can or should be done. Maybe this isn't the best item to start with?
IfI had some more direction, it might be straightforward enough.
One thing I did notice: sequence names are stored in both pg_type.typname and pg_class.relkind. I presume both tables
wouldneed to be updated, unless we remove the redundancy? Why can they not be updated within a single transaction
(easily)?What sort of restructuring would be needed to separate out the transactional vs non-transactional aspects?
thanks!
--craig
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs