RE: Postgre7.0.2 drop user bug - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Matthew
Subject RE: Postgre7.0.2 drop user bug
Date
Msg-id 183FA749499ED311B6550000F87E206C0C93E9@srv.ctlno.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Postgre7.0.2 drop user bug  (Matthew <matt@ctlno.com>)
Responses Re: Postgre7.0.2 drop user bug  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tom Lane

>The correct fix is CommandCounterIncrement() in the DROP USER loop,
>so that later iterations can see the changes made by prior iterations.
>
>            regards, tom lane

Since postgre now suppport referential integrity and cascading deletes,
wouldn't it make more sense to use that code to manage the relationship
between pg_user and pg_group (and probably a wealth of other system tables),
rather then having to write specific code to manage every relationship
between system tables, or are those types of constraints just not applicable
to system tables?


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Matthew
Date:
Subject: RE: Postgre7.0.2 drop user bug
Next
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: pg_dump docs