From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Do we still need these NOTICEs? |
Date: | 2002-07-17 03:19:32 |
Message-ID: | 3D34E244.9070701@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>I am considering removing the following notices/warnings, since they
>>seem to be unnecessary in the brave new world of dependencies:
I also agree with removing all of these.
>>* The ones about implicit indexes for primary key/unique constraints
>>and about implicit sequences for SERIAL columns also seem unnecessary
>>now --- as with the trigger case, you can't drop the implicit object
>>directly anymore.
One thing I wondered about here -- is it still possible to use a
sequence, which is autogenerated by a SERIAL column, as the default
value for another table? If so, does this create another dependency to
prevent dropping the sequence, and hence the original (creating) table also?
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-17 03:24:25 | Re: Do we still need these NOTICEs? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-17 03:15:58 | Re: DROP COLUMN |