|From:||Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|To:||Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2017/02/22 13:46, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> Looks good to me. In the attached patch I have added a comment
> explaining the reason to make partition tables "Auto" dependent upon
> the corresponding partitioned tables.
+ * Unlike inheritance children, partition tables are expected to be dropped
+ * when the parent partitioned table gets dropped.
Hmm. Partitions *are* inheritance children, so we perhaps don't need the
part before the comma. Also, adding "automatically" somewhere in there
would be nice.
Or, one could just write: /* add an auto dependency for partitions */
> In the tests we are firing commands to drop partitioned table, but are
> not checking whether those tables or the partitions are getting
> dropped or not. Except for drop_if_exists.sql, I did not find that we
> really check this. Should we try a query on pg_class to ensure that
> the tables get really dropped?
I don't see why this patch should do it, if dependency.sql itself does
not? I mean dropping AUTO dependent objects is one of the contracts of
dependency.c, so perhaps it would make sense to query pg_class in
dependency.sql to check if AUTO dependencies work correctly.
|Next Message||Jim Nasby||2017-02-22 05:43:16||Re: mat views stats|
|Previous Message||Jim Nasby||2017-02-22 05:38:04||Re: Adding new output parameter of pg_stat_statements to identify operation of the query.|