On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 09:56, Jan Wieck wrote: > Joe Conway wrote: > > The problem is that you would still need to keep a copy of your view > > around to recreate it if you wanted to drop and recreate a table it > > depends on. I really like the idea about keeping the original view > > source handy in the system catalogs. > > This has been the case all the time. I only see an attempt to > make this impossible with the new dependency system. If I *must* > specify CASCADE to drop an object, my view depends on, my view > will be gone. If I don't CASCADE, I cannot drop the object. > > So there is no way left to break the view temporarily (expert > mode here, I know what I do so please let me)
I guess the real expert could manipulate pg_depends ;) > and fix it later by just reparsing the views definition. --------- Hannu ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
