Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-13 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How about: >> DropFoo --- top level, corresponds to SQL DROP command >> DropCascadeFoo --- dependency controller >> RemoveFoo--- bottom level deleter There is only one dependency controller; it's not Foo anything. And I don't want to

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> The correct thing to do is to call performDeletion() with a parameter > > > Should it be called performDrop rather than Deletion? > > Well, if you want to rationalize the naming of these various routines: > > I think DROP ought to

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-13 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The correct thing to do is to call performDeletion() with a parameter > Should it be called performDrop rather than Deletion? Well, if you want to rationalize the naming of these various routines: I think DROP ought to be associated with the SQL-leve

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-13 Thread Rod Taylor
On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 10:27, Tom Lane wrote: > Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I noticed that SERIAL sequences aren't dropping with the application of > > the patch. > > > Was this intentional? > > Yeah, the dependency isn't stored yet. I didn't like the way you did > that, and was t

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-13 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I noticed that SERIAL sequences aren't dropping with the application of > the patch. > Was this intentional? Yeah, the dependency isn't stored yet. I didn't like the way you did that, and was trying to think of a better way... More generally, a lot of d

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-13 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Which of these are done with the patch? > Below is what I listed off as complete when submitting the patch. Note that I have not yet finished committing all of Rod's original patch. regards, tom lane ---(

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-12 Thread Rod Taylor
On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 15:17, Tom Lane wrote: > Now that the pg_depend mechanism is mostly in there, it is no longer > a good idea to delete things directly (for example, by calling > heap_drop_with_catalog or even just heap_delete'ing a catalog tuple). I noticed that SERIAL sequences aren't dropp

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Thanks, TODO updated. I split out "Make constraints clearer in dump file" into a foreign key version, which I marked as done, and a second version which I left as undone. Thanks. That's a heap of items completed. --- Rod

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-12 Thread Rod Taylor
> * Add pg_depend table for dependency recording; use sysrelid, oid, > depend_sysrelid, depend_oid, name > * Auto-destroy sequence on DROP of table with SERIAL; perhaps a separate > SERIAL type > * Have SERIAL generate non-colliding sequence names when we have >

Re: [HACKERS] Memo on dropping practices

2002-07-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Now that the pg_depend mechanism is mostly in there, it is no longer > a good idea to delete things directly (for example, by calling > heap_drop_with_catalog or even just heap_delete'ing a catalog tuple). > > The correct thing to do is to call performDeletion() with a parameter