Re: pg_depend
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_depend |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22202.995334666@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_depend (Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_depend
RE: pg_depend |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes: > Is it really determined that *DROP OBJECT* drops the objects > which are dependent on it ? DROP object CASCADE should work that way, because that's what the spec says. Whether the default DROP behavior should be CASCADE, RESTRICT, or the current laissez-faire behavior remains to be debated ;-). The spec is no help since it has no default: DROP *requires* a CASCADE or RESTRICT option in SQL92. But I doubt our users will let us get away with changing the syntax that way. So, once we have the CASCADE and RESTRICT options implemented, we'll need to decide what an unadorned DROP should do. Opinions anyone? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: