On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 3:20 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.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
