Re: DROP VIEW code question

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Mark Hollomon <mhh(at)mindspring(dot)com>
Cc: hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DROP VIEW code question
Date: 2000-10-17 20:33:07
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0010172229430.9649-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Mark Hollomon writes:

> Also
>
> "DROP TABLE x, y, z" is allowed, but
>
> "DROP VIEW x, y, z" is not.
>
> Any reason other than historical?

I don't know how it looks now, but the "DROP TABLE x, y, z" was pretty
broken a while ago. For example, if there was some sort of dependency
between the tables (foreign keys?) it would abort and leave an
inconsistent state. I'm not very fond of this extension, but keep the
issue in mind.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-10-17 20:33:20 Re: DROP VIEW code question
Previous Message Mark Hollomon 2000-10-17 20:16:00 DROP VIEW code question