On 2022-Oct-11, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > diff --git a/src/test/modules/test_ddl_deparse/expected/alter_table.out > b/src/test/modules/test_ddl_deparse/expected/alter_table.out > index 87a1ab7aabce..30e3dbb8d08a 100644 > --- a/src/test/modules/test_ddl_deparse/expected/alter_table.out > +++ b/src/test/modules/test_ddl_deparse/expected/alter_table.out > @@ -25,12 +25,9 @@ NOTICE: DDL test: type simple, tag CREATE TABLE > CREATE TABLE grandchild () INHERITS (child); > NOTICE: DDL test: type simple, tag CREATE TABLE > ALTER TABLE parent ADD COLUMN b serial; > -NOTICE: DDL test: type simple, tag CREATE SEQUENCE > -NOTICE: DDL test: type alter table, tag ALTER TABLE > -NOTICE: subcommand: type ADD COLUMN (and recurse) desc column b of table > parent > -NOTICE: DDL test: type simple, tag ALTER SEQUENCE > +ERROR: cannot recursively add identity column to table that has child tables
I think this change merits some discussion. Surely we cannot simply disallow SERIAL from being used with inheritance. Do we need to have a way for identity columns to be used by children tables? (My first thought was "let's keep SERIAL as the old code when used for inheritance", but then I realized that the parent table starts as a normal-looking table that only later acquires inheritors, so we wouldn't know ahead of time that we need to treat that SERIAL column in a special way.) -- Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "La vida es para el que se aventura"
