On 04/01/2015 12:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> The only possible issue I see on reading the patches is that these are
>> treated differently for dependencies than other regFOO types. Rather
>> than create a dependency if a value is used in a default expression, an
>> error is raised if one is found. Are we OK with that?
> Why would it be a good idea to act differently from the others?
>
>
I have no idea.
It was mentioned here
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150218.174231.125293096.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
but nobody seems to have commented. I'm not sure why it was done like
this. Adding the dependencies seems to be no harder than raising the
exception. I think we can kick this back to the author to fix.
cheers
andrew