Re: composite types DROP..CASCADE behaviour - bug or intentional?

>
>
> Consider the following on latest sources:
>
> postgres=# create type c3 as (y int, z c1);

Oops, please disregard the above copy-paste unwanted sql.

>
> postgres=# create type comptype1 as (elem1 int);
>
> postgres=# create type comptype2 as (elem1 int, elem2 comptype1);
> postgres=# \d comptype2
> Composite type "public.comptype2"
> Column | Type
> --------+-----------
> elem1 | integer
> elem2 | comptype1
>
> postgres=# drop type comptype1 cascade;
> NOTICE: drop cascades to composite type comptype2 column elem2
> postgres=# \d comptype2
> Composite type "public.comptype2"
> Column | Type
> --------+---------
> elem1 | integer
>
> Shouldn't the drop cascade have deleted comptype2 itself, instead of just
> deleting the dependent column? Or this is the expected intentional
> behaviour?
>
> Regards,
> Nikhils
> --
> http://www.enterprisedb.com
>

--
http://www.enterprisedb.com