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

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages)
Дата
Msg-id 16446.1549697160@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order(regressions in DROP diagnostic messages)  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order(regressions in DROP diagnostic messages)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 9:41 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> +1.  The best solution would presumably be to go through the normal
>> object deletion mechanism; though possibly there's a reason that
>> won't work given you're already inside some other DDL.

> Maybe:
> - CatalogTupleDelete(trigrel, &trigtup->t_self);
> + RemoveTriggerById(trgform->oid)?

No, that's still the back end of the deletion machinery, and in particular
it would fail to clean pg_depend entries for the trigger.  Going in by the
front door would use performDeletion().  (See deleteOneObject() to get
an idea of what's being possibly missed out here.)

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Langote
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order(regressions in DROP diagnostic messages)
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?