From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: User-friendliness for DROP RESTRICT/CASCADE |
Date: | 2002-06-27 01:50:56 |
Message-ID: | 200206270150.g5R1ouu18503@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor wrote:
> > David Kaplan reminded me that there is another UI issue to be
> > considered: when we *are* doing a DROP CASCADE, should the dropped
> > dependent objects be reported somehow? As it stands, Rod's patch emits
> > elog(NOTICE) messages in this case, but I am wondering whether that will
> > be seen as useful or merely annoying chatter.
>
> If the notices about implicit drops (triggers on tables, etc.) has been
> found to be useful in both creation and destruction then I would assume
> that this information would be wanted as well.
>
> If the above information has not been found to be useful in the past,
> then I would expect it to continue as chatter.
>
> Personally, I find it to be chatter and turn off NOTICES in general, but
> believe it to be consistent with similar messages in the past.
Agreed. If you issue a single DROP that hits other objects, I think
people would want to see that, but then again, if you drop the table,
you would expect triggers and sequences to disappear with no mention.
Tough one.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2002-06-27 01:54:58 | Re: Database comparison ideas |
Previous Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2002-06-27 00:29:48 | Re: Postgres idea list |