Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Agreed --- I committed what I had, anyone want to volunteer for
> refactoring the execution of DropStmt?

Sure! see the attached patch...

> After looking again, I think that this is not technically very
> difficult, but coming up with something that looks tasteful to everyone
> might be tricky. In particular I didn't see a nice way to do it without
> using struct ObjectAddress in a bunch of header files that don't
> currently include dependency.h. A possible response to that is to move
> ObjectAddress into postgres.h, but that seems a bit ugly too.

Ok I'm obviously missing something important... Why not Just make the
various Remove* functions take a list?

I'm not proposing this patch for actual submission, more of a would this work?
If I'm not missing something glaring obvious Ill go ahead and make the
rest of the Remove things behave the same way