From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ignore_system_indexes affects DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE reported number of objects dropped |
Date: | 2018-05-04 03:03:07 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmtXk8aGF2FsP6qx9T6qCjq9tdPj5YoFQaOMQQnSsPXSw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 7:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Ah, I think it's just an order-of-visitation issue then. There are
> dependencies at both the column and whole-table level, specifically
>
> schema collate_tests -> table collate_test4
> schema collate_tests -> domain testdomain_p -> column collate_test4.b
>
> I think if we already know that table collate_test4 is scheduled to be
> deleted, we just ignore column collate_test4.b when the recursion reaches
> that ... but if we visit those two things in the other order, then both
> will be reported as deletion targets. And it's not surprising that
> disabling indexscans on pg_depend changes the visitation order.
I also noticed that there are cases where we see less helpful (though
still technically correct) HINT messages about which other object the
user may prefer to drop.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-05-04 03:19:49 | Re: ignore_system_indexes affects DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE reported number of objects dropped |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-05-04 02:42:41 | Re: unused_oids script is broken with bsd sed |