Tom Lane dijo:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@atentus.com> writes:
> > I understand what's going on and how to get the desired behavior, but
> > it's weird and I think it should be fixed if possible.
>
> Define why you consider this broken
On the first case, if I'm specifying to drop both tables, I don't want
to be bothered telling me that the second depends on the first: I have
already specified that I want it dropped.
On the second case (CASCADE), I'm trying to drop the second table, so I
do not want to be bothered telling me that it doesn't exist, because
that is exactly what I want.
> and what you would consider fixed.
In both cases (CASCADE and RESTRICT), both tables should be dropped
(after all, that's what I'm trying to do).
It's only an annoyance, and I suppose it's very difficult to "fix".
My solution would be first to fetch the whole list of OIDs to be dropped
and only then do the deletion.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]atentus.com>)
"Tiene valor aquel que admite que es un cobarde" (Fernandel)