On 2019-Jul-07, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ideally, perhaps, a DROP CASCADE like this would not cascade to
> the whole table but only to the table's partitioned-ness property,
> leaving you with a non-partitioned table with most of its data
> intact. It would take a lot of work to make that happen though,
> and it certainly wouldn't be back-patchable, and I'm not really
> sure it's worth it.
Maybe we can add dependencies to rows of the pg_partitioned_table
relation, with the semantics of "depends on the partitioned-ness of the
table"?
That said, I'm not sure I see the use case for an ALTER TABLE .. DROP
COLUMN command that turns a partitioned table (with existing partitions
containing data) into one non-partitioned table with all data minus the
partitioning column(s).
This seems vaguely related to the issue of dropping foreign keys; see
https://postgr.es/m/20190329152239.GA29258@alvherre.pgsql wherein I
settled with a non-ideal solution to the problem of being unable to
depend on something that did not cause the entire table to be dropped
in certain cases.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services