On 2019-Jul-07, Tom Lane wrote: > Ideally, perhaps, a DROP CASCADE like this would not cascade to > the whole table but only to the table's partitioned-ness property, > leaving you with a non-partitioned table with most of its data > intact. It would take a lot of work to make that happen though, > and it certainly wouldn't be back-patchable, and I'm not really > sure it's worth it.
Maybe we can add dependencies to rows of the pg_partitioned_table relation, with the semantics of "depends on the partitioned-ness of the table"? That said, I'm not sure I see the use case for an ALTER TABLE .. DROP COLUMN command that turns a partitioned table (with existing partitions containing data) into one non-partitioned table with all data minus the partitioning column(s). This seems vaguely related to the issue of dropping foreign keys; see https://postgr.es/m/20190329152239.GA29258@alvherre.pgsql wherein I settled with a non-ideal solution to the problem of being unable to depend on something that did not cause the entire table to be dropped in certain cases. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
