Re: clone_schema function

To make the casual user's life easier, in the face of this reality, it would nice if the routine would generate a reasonably attempted "diff" between the two so that all changes can be reviewed in a structured manner aided by correctly configured tools and advice.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com> wrote:

Igor,
I understand your point, however, I have spent over a week making a function
that previously did very little do a lot.

Naming a table the same as a schema is a very silly idea.

Unless you care to take the time to provide a full

schema, and function that fails for reasonable , practical design

I will ignore all further comments.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Igor Neyman <ineyman@perceptron.com> wrote:

 

That is correct. But table old will NOT be converted to new because

only the schema name is converted. And table "old" WILL exist because it will also be copied.

I have tested and it works properly.

Please do not provide hypothetical examples. Give me an actual working example that causes the problem.

This statement:

SELECT old.field FROM old.old;

selects column “field” from table “old” which is in schema “old”.

Your script converts it into:

SELECT new.field FROM new.old

which will try to select column “field” from table “old” in schema “new”.

 

Again:

SELECT new.field

means select column “field” from table “new”, which does not exists.

Not sure, what other example you need.

Regards,

Igor Neyman

--

Melvin Davidson
I reserve the right to fantasize.  Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.