Re: pg_depend

> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> > Reference name is needed not an object name,
> 
> Only if we want to support the notion that drop-and-recreate-with-same-name
> means that references from other objects should now apply to the new
> object.  I do not think that that's really a good idea, at least not
> without a heck of a lot of compatibility checking.  It'd be way too easy
> to create cases where the properties of the new object do not match
> what the referring object expects.
> 
> The majority of the cases I've heard about where this would be useful
> are for functions, and we could solve that a lot better with an ALTER
> FUNCTION command that allows changing the function body (but not the
> name, arguments, or result type).
> 
> BTW, name alone is not a good enough referent for functions... you'd
> have to store the argument types too.

I assume the name was only for reference use so you could give the user
an idea of what is missing.  Clearly you don't use that to recreate
anything, or I hope not.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026