> > My point was that there could still be a conflict against a user column
> > that the user tries to create *later*. So it's illusory to think that
> > making the name of a dropped column less predictable will improve
> > matters.
>
> The simple (to describe, perhaps not to implement ;) way to
On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 20:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> But you *didn't* make sure it would never be a problem.
>
> > Wasn't I looping until I found a unique name?
>
> My point was that there could still be a conflict against a user column
> that
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But you *didn't* make sure it would never be a problem.
> Wasn't I looping until I found a unique name?
My point was that there could still be a conflict against a user column
that the user tries to create *later*. So it's illusory to thi
> Yup, we need to figure out a way of preventing that. I've been thinking
> about adding an attisinherited column to pg_attribute, to mark columns
> that came from a parent table. Such a column could not be renamed or
> dropped except in a command that's recursed from the parent. (But what
> ab
