Re: Better way to handle suppression of CASCADE detail messages

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Better way to handle suppression of CASCADE detail messages
Date: 2017-08-01 17:39:22
Message-ID: 20170801173922.txyo6nr4j5grgipf@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2017-08-01 13:34:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, in the long run maybe we should instead make the CASCADE message
> ordering more predictable, perhaps by sorting the objects by OID.
> But that's not a job for beta time.

Oid is probably not good enough - with parallel tests and such it's not
necessarily predicable. Even less so when the tests are run against an
existing cluster. Sorting by name would probably be better...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-08-01 17:48:34 Re: Better way to handle suppression of CASCADE detail messages
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-08-01 17:36:49 Re: More flexible LDAP auth search filters?