From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages) |
Date: | 2019-02-09 15:56:13 |
Message-ID: | 20190209155613.GA2091@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Feb-09, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 9:41 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> +1. The best solution would presumably be to go through the normal
> >> object deletion mechanism; though possibly there's a reason that
> >> won't work given you're already inside some other DDL.
>
> > Maybe:
> > - CatalogTupleDelete(trigrel, &trigtup->t_self);
> > + RemoveTriggerById(trgform->oid)?
>
> No, that's still the back end of the deletion machinery, and in particular
> it would fail to clean pg_depend entries for the trigger. Going in by the
> front door would use performDeletion(). (See deleteOneObject() to get
> an idea of what's being possibly missed out here.)
This patch I think does the right thing.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
fix-trigger-drop.patch | text/x-diff | 1.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-09 16:10:38 | Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-09 15:27:24 | Re: add_partial_path() may remove dominated path but still in use |