Hi all,
Currently, ALTER TABLE ... OWNER will change the ownership of a table,
view, sequence or index -- despite the fact that its name hints that it
is only for 'altering tables'.
1) Is this behavior optimal? There is clearly a need to change the
ownership of relations other than tables, but it seems to me that
pushing this functionality into ALTER TABLE is unintuitive.
On the other hand, creating ALTER INDEX ... OWNER, ALTER SEQUENCE ...
OWNER, etc. seems like overkill.
2) Should we perhaps warn the user, if they use 'ALTER TABLE ... OWNER'
on a non-table relation?
3) Should this behavior be documented? Currently the docs on ALTER TABLE
... OWNER say nothing about changing the ownership of non-table
relations.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC