Re: Do we still need these NOTICEs?
От | Christopher Kings-Lynne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Do we still need these NOTICEs? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOAECPCDAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Do we still need these NOTICEs? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> * The one about dropping a built-in function; you can't do it anyway. > > regression=# drop function now(); > WARNING: Removing built-in function "now" > ERROR: Cannot drop function now because it is required by the > database system > regression=# Get rid of it. > * The one about creating implicit triggers for FOREIGN KEY constraints: > > regression=# create table bar (f1 int references foo); > NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit trigger(s) for FOREIGN > KEY check(s) > CREATE TABLE > regression=# > > Since those triggers (a) will be auto-dropped when you drop the > constraint, and (b) can't be dropped without dropping the constraint, > this notice seems like it's just noise now. Yep - may as well. > regression=# \d bar > Table "bar" > Column | Type | Modifiers > --------+---------+----------- > f1 | integer | > Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_140127 > > regression=# drop trigger "RI_ConstraintTrigger_140127" on bar; > ERROR: Cannot drop trigger RI_ConstraintTrigger_140127 on table > bar because constraint $1 on table bar requires it > You may drop constraint $1 on table bar instead > regression=# alter table bar drop constraint "$1"; > ALTER TABLE > regression=# \d bar > Table "bar" > Column | Type | Modifiers > --------+---------+----------- > f1 | integer | > > regression=# > > * The ones about implicit indexes for primary key/unique constraints > and about implicit sequences for SERIAL columns also seem unnecessary > now --- as with the trigger case, you can't drop the implicit object > directly anymore. However, the messages do convey some useful > information, namely the exact name that was assigned to the index or > sequence. So I'm undecided about removing 'em. The sequence message > seems particularly useful since people do often want to refer directly > to the sequence in manual nextval/currval commands. OTOH psql's \d is a > perfectly reasonable way to get the sequence and index names if you need > 'em. Moreover, that still works after the fact whereas a NOTICE soon > disappears from sight. Hmmmm...undecided. I generally wouldn't care I guess, but some people might... Chris
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: