| From: | Bill Studenmund <wrstuden(at)zembu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_depend |
| Date: | 2001-07-16 23:29:58 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.4.21.0107161628310.642-100000@candlekeep.home-net.internetconnect.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Alex Pilosov writes:
>
> > > I'm not so convinced on that idea. Assume you're dropping object foo.
> > > You look at pg_depend and see that objects 145928, 264792, and 1893723
> > > depend on it. Great, what do you do now?
> > I believe someone else previously suggested this:
> >
> > drop <type> object [RESTRICT | CASCADE]
> >
> > to make use of dependency info.
>
> That was me. The point, however, was, given object id 145928, how the
> heck to you know what table this comes from?
You have three columns, depender, dependee, and the third the oid of the
entry of pg_class describing what the depender is. Oh, actually you'd
probably need four columns, depender, dependee, depender in pg_class, and
dependee in pg_class.
Take care,
Bill
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2001-07-17 00:15:58 | Re: ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN column SERIAL -- unexpected results |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-07-16 23:25:27 | Re: pg_depend |