On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2017/02/22 13:46, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> Looks good to me. In the attached patch I have added a comment
>> explaining the reason to make partition tables "Auto" dependent upon
>> the corresponding partitioned tables.
>
> Good call.
>
> + /*
> + * Unlike inheritance children, partition tables are expected to be dropped
> + * when the parent partitioned table gets dropped.
> + */
>
> Hmm. Partitions *are* inheritance children, so we perhaps don't need the
> part before the comma. Also, adding "automatically" somewhere in there
> would be nice.
>
> Or, one could just write: /* add an auto dependency for partitions */
I changed it in the attached patch to
+ /*
+ * Partition tables are expected to be dropped when the parent partitioned
+ * table gets dropped.
+ */
>
>> In the tests we are firing commands to drop partitioned table, but are
>> not checking whether those tables or the partitions are getting
>> dropped or not. Except for drop_if_exists.sql, I did not find that we
>> really check this. Should we try a query on pg_class to ensure that
>> the tables get really dropped?
>
> I don't see why this patch should do it, if dependency.sql itself does
> not? I mean dropping AUTO dependent objects is one of the contracts of
> dependency.c, so perhaps it would make sense to query pg_class in
> dependency.sql to check if AUTO dependencies work correctly.
Hmm, I agree.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers