Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I think that's an acceptable solution, provided it works well. *IFF*
>>> it is very very very very clear to the user that this is what happens
>>> (extra warning dialog(s), please!). A lot of people have tables small
>>> enough that this is not a problem.
>>>
>>> And remember that it's not quite as trivial as one would initially
>>> think - you still need to recreate all indexes and foreign keys and
>>> sutff. But it's certainly doable.
>> And views and functions and rules and triggers.... Just handling that
>> lot would be a significant amount of code.
>
> Well, dependency trakcing should help with that -. at least with
> identifying when it can't be done. But yes, it may take a lot of code.
>
Sure this will need a lot of code
>
>> My main concerns though, are the space requirements for a large table
>> and the locking that would be required. This is not something you
>> would attempt on a large or busy table unless you were certifiably
>> insane.
>>
User should be warned while changing a larger table, like are you sure
you want to do this, this will take long time.
>
> Agreed - thus the warning requirement.
>
>
I am going to use add column and move data method for reordering
columns, http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Alter_column_position describes
reordering columns or altering column positions methods. Dependency
tracking is a really hard work, i agree.