| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: ON COMMIT actions and inheritance |
| Date: | 2018-11-08 09:08:43 |
| Message-ID: | 2da2f1d0-85f1-ad72-eebf-4c0a47736fc0@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/11/08 18:03, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:46:46PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> How about:
>> When used on tables with inheritance children (including partitioned
>> tables), this also drops the children (partitions).
>
> Even if the style gets heavier, I have also the following in my box:
> When used on a partitioned table, this action drops its partitions and
> when used on tables with inheritance children, it drops the depending
> children.
I think we don't need to say "depending" children here, even though I know
the dependency management system is involved internally.
In the end, I will let you go with whatever you think is clearer. :)
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tillmann Schulz | 2018-11-08 09:20:13 | Re: BUG #15448: server process (PID 22656) was terminated by exception 0xC0000005 |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-11-08 09:03:47 | Re: ON COMMIT actions and inheritance |