Re: questions on ALTER TABLE ... OWNER

nconway@klamath.dyndns.org (Neil Conway) writes:
> 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.

Definitely overkill.  I'd say tweak the docs and leave the code alone.
        regards, tom lane