Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages)

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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: 2019-02-10 13:05:53
Message-ID: 20190210130553.GA31738@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Feb-09, Tom Lane wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2019-Feb-09, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Uh-huh. And what happens after DETACH PARTITION ... are you going to run
> >> around and recreate these triggers?
>
> > Yep, that's there too.
>
> OK, then I guess it's fine.

Thanks for verifying; pushed now.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2019-02-10 16:00:35 Re: dsa_allocate() faliure
Previous Message Julien Rouhaud 2019-02-10 12:23:44 Re: Inadequate executor locking of indexes