Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > > > In fact, looking at it logically...if all the commands currently are > > > required to check that they're not modifiying a system column, > > then why not > > > add the requirement that they must also not modify dropped > > columns? I can > > > do a careful doc search and try to make sure I've touched everything... > > > > Makes sense. Of course, we could make a syscache that didn't return > > system columns either. > > Actually - are you certain that every command uses a SearchSysCache and not > some other weirdness? If we have to do the odd exception, then maybe we > should do them all as 'exceptions'?
I actually don't know. I know all the table name lookups do use syscache or temp tables wouldn't have worked. ;-) -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
