| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
| Subject: | Re: User-friendliness for DROP RESTRICT/CASCADE |
| Date: | 2002-06-26 22:30:08 |
| Message-ID: | 16383.1025130608@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> It would be nice if the recursive dependency checking function was
> available as an end user function too, so you could analyze dependencies
> before even trying to drop something, or even just to understand a
> database schema you've inherited from someone else.
It'd be a pretty trivial exercise to build something that looks at the
pg_depend entries and generates whatever kind of display you want.
David Kaplan reminded me that there is another UI issue to be
considered: when we *are* doing a DROP CASCADE, should the dropped
dependent objects be reported somehow? As it stands, Rod's patch emits
elog(NOTICE) messages in this case, but I am wondering whether that will
be seen as useful or merely annoying chatter.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2002-06-26 22:36:58 | Support (was: Democracy and organisation) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-26 22:07:04 | Re: (A) native Windows port |