| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Show sequences owned by |
| Date: | 2011-11-04 14:44:27 |
| Message-ID: | 7386.1320417867@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I just noticed it was pulling from pg_depend and we could be creating
> multiple dependencies on a single sequence by having two tables use it
> as a default value. If that situation doesn't cause a problem for this,
> then that's fine. :) Couldn't remember if we distinguished 'owned by'
> from 'dependend upon' for seqeunces.
Yeah, we do, via the deptype. The check for deptype = 'a' is the
correct thing here.
Still, I'm not terribly comfortable with having multiple matches be
treated as a reason to fail the entire \d command. It'd likely be
better to just not add a footer if you get an unexpected number of
matches.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-11-04 14:46:24 | Re: heap_page_prune comments |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-11-04 14:43:48 | Re: IDLE in transaction introspection |