Re: DROP VIEW name WITHOUT TYPE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Przemysław Sztoch <przemyslaw(at)sztoch(dot)pl>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DROP VIEW name WITHOUT TYPE
Date: 2024-11-08 14:58:21
Message-ID: 3630633.1731077901@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

=?UTF-8?Q?Przemys=C5=82aw_Sztoch?= <przemyslaw(at)sztoch(dot)pl> writes:
> Am I right, If we leave (or convert) TYPE linked to VIEW, then DROP will be possible?

No ...

CREATE VIEW level1 AS SELECT * FROM base_table;
CREATE VIEW level2 AS SELECT * FROM level1;

You can't drop level1 without dropping level2; the composite type
associated with level1 doesn't enter into that. I'd actually
find it rather surprising if there are many real-world cases where
other objects have a dependency on a view's composite type but not
on the view itself.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2024-11-08 14:57:30 Re: logical replication: restart_lsn can go backwards (and more), seems broken since 9.4