Re: Cascaded Column Drop
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cascaded Column Drop |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.44.0209270009490.27017-100000@alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Cascaded Column Drop (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Cascaded Column Drop
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian dijo: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca> writes: > > > When a cascaded column drop is removing the last column, drop the table > > > instead. Regression tests via domains. > > > > Is that a good idea, or should we refuse the drop entirely? A table > > drop zaps a lot more stuff than a column drop. > > I think we should refuse the drop. It is just too strange. You can > suggest if they want the column dropped, just drop the table. Yeah... you can't have triggers, you can't have constraints. Hey, you can create a view using it, and possibly you can inherit the table... but what's that good for? But think about the inheritance case again: suppose create table p (f1 int); create table c (f2 int) inherits (p); Now you just change your mind and want to drop p but not c. You can't do it because f1 is the last column on it, and c inherits it. So a way to drop the last column inherited (thus freeing the dependency on p) makes c independent, and you can drop p. But note that this drop of p is not just drop-cascade: the inheritance tree has to get out of the dependency info first (it's not drop-restrict either, is it?) -- Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]atentus.com>) "La espina, desde que nace, ya pincha" (Proverbio africano)
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: