| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages) |
| Date: | 2019-01-17 23:38:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wz=uTA7+UK7WZd1VfuGVP_DcpiSswjObRzVXPmouuXsSxg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 3:20 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > There is a symmetry to these that led me to have the same kind of
> > dependency from the index partition to the other two.
>
> It's symmetric as long as you suppose that the above are the only
> requirements. However, there's another requirement, which is that
> if you do try to drop the index partition directly, we would like
> the error message to suggest dropping the master index, not the
> table. The only way to be sure about what will be suggested is
> if there can be only one "owning object".
+1. This is certainly a necessary requirement. Absurd error messages
are not okay.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mikael Kjellström | 2019-01-17 23:46:45 | Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-01-17 23:33:06 | Re: [PATCH] get rid of StdRdOptions, use individual binary reloptions representation for each relation kind instead |