From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah(at)trade-india(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: alter table cascade does not give notice about dropped |
Date: | 2004-07-06 17:24:12 |
Message-ID: | 200407061724.i66HOCt24708@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> >Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah(at)trade-india(dot)com> writes:
> >
> >
> >>Looks like alter table does not tells about the indexes it dropped
> >>
> >>
> >
> >This is intentional --- we don't require you to say CASCADE to get rid
> >of an index, either.
> >
>
> I initailly ran the alter table without cascade option ,
>
> it told me there is a dependent view.
>
> I did cascade , it droped the view and it also dropped a
> multicolumn index that contained the column.
>
> I notified me about the dropped view but not about
> the index.
>
> Is that ok ?
I think so. We consider the index to be bound to the table, while the
view is more distinct and could include other table references as well.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Anony Mous | 2004-07-06 17:25:07 | Re: Do we need more emphasis on backup? |
Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2004-07-06 16:53:34 | Re: Interpreting query plan |