From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages) |
Date: | 2019-01-17 22:15:54 |
Message-ID: | 201901172215.plncg34crv3b@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Jan-17, Tom Lane wrote:
> DEPENDENCY_INTERNAL_AUTO, however, broke this completely, as the code
> has no hesitation about making multiple entries of that kind. After
> rather cursorily looking at that code, I'm leaning to the position
> that DEPENDENCY_INTERNAL_AUTO is broken-by-design and needs to be
> nuked from orbit. In the cases where it's being used, such as
> partitioned indexes, I think that probably the right design is one
> DEPENDENCY_INTERNAL dependency on the partition master index, and
> then one DEPENDENCY_AUTO dependency on the matching partitioned table.
As I recall, the problem with that approach is that you can't drop the
partition when a partitioned index exists, because it follows the link
to the parent index and tries to drop that.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-01-17 22:23:02 | Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD |
Previous Message | Mikael Kjellström | 2019-01-17 22:12:43 | Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD |