On 10/6/21, 3:44 PM, "Tom Lane" <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Bossart, Nathan" <bossa...@amazon.com> writes: >> Here's a patch that ERRORs if the object type and statement type do >> not match. Interestingly, some of the regression tests were relying >> on this behavior. > > ... as, no doubt, are a lot of applications that this will gratuitously > break. We've long had a policy that ALTER TABLE will work on relations > that aren't tables, so long as the requested operation is sensible.
Right. > The situation for "ALTER some-other-relation-kind" is a bit more > confused, because some cases throw errors and some don't; but I really > doubt that tightening things up here will earn you anything but > brickbats. I *definitely* don't agree with discarding the policy > about ALTER TABLE, especially if it's only done for RENAME. I think we should at least consider adding this check for ALTER INDEX since we choose a different lock level in that case. Nathan
