"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 3. Or, perhaps we could change recordDependencyOnSingleRelExpr so
>> that it generates a whole-table dependency on the target relation
>> even if there are no Vars in the expression. This would make it
>> act much more like the regular-query context
Tom Lane wrote:
> 3. Or, perhaps we could change recordDependencyOnSingleRelExpr so
> that it generates a whole-table dependency on the target relation
> even if there are no Vars in the expression. This would make it
> act much more like the regular-query context that
> find_expr_references_wa
Tom Lane writes:
> Any thoughts out there?
Color me slow, but I don't understand what allows an index creation on a
table to not systematically add a dependency entry for the index that
references the table.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formatio
I wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> create index t_sname on t (sname(t));
> Huh, interesting. The reason the DROP misbehaves is that the index
> doesn't have any dependency at all on table "t". Which appears to
> be exposing the folly of this bit in find_expr_references_walker:
> /*
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> create index t_sname on t (sname(t));
Huh, interesting. The reason the DROP misbehaves is that the index
doesn't have any dependency at all on table "t". Which appears to
be exposing the folly of this bit in find_expr_references_walker:
/*
* A whole-
Checkout from HEAD this morning, no modifications. Did make
distclean and fresh build to ensure no problems caused by mixed
build. 32 bit kubuntu on single drive dual core workstation. Fresh
initdb. Default configuration.
postgres=# create database bug;
CREATE DATABASE
postgres=# \c bug
You ar
