-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, as far as the dependency system goes this way is more convenient.
> If pg_attribute entries had their own OIDs it would be fairly hard
> to implement DROP TABLE except with an intermediate step of dropping
> each of the columns one by one, because you'd pretty much have to have
> explicit pg_depend entries linking each column to its table, and that
> behavior is what you'd get from the dependency traversal.
So, we do not want attributes to be dependent on the relation, because
that complicates DROP TABLE. On the other hand, we want defaults (and
possibly ACLs) to be dependent, so that the dependency system cleans
them up when dropping the table. It that correct?
ISTM that we should at least combine defaults and ACLs then, as proposed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2008-09-23 13:26:11|
|Subject: Re: Planner question|
|Previous:||From: Gregory Stark||Date: 2008-09-23 13:16:02|
|Subject: Re: Common Table Expressions (WITH RECURSIVE) patch|