On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> On 29 February 2012 17:16, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> writes:
>>> So could we introduce either a command to show which objects are owned
>>> by a particular role, or allow a dry-run of DROP OWNED BY?
>> It's always been possible to do that:
>> drop owned by joe;
>> I believe this is already the recommended approach if you're concerned
>> about what DROP CASCADE will do.
> No, the cascade part is fine. It's the objects which won't cause a
> cascade that are an issue. Putting it in a transaction for rolling
> back doesn't help find out what it intends to drop.
> How can the user tell what the statement would drop (ignoring cascades)?
It's certainly possible to write a query for this, but I think this
gets back to the old argument about whether every client (and every
end-user) should be required to reimplement this, or whether maybe we
ought to provide some server functionality around it.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2012-02-29 18:32:48|
|Subject: Re: controlling the location of server-side SSL files|
|Previous:||From: Thom Brown||Date: 2012-02-29 18:23:29|
|Subject: Re: LIST OWNED BY...|