Re: pg_depend - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alex Pilosov
Subject Re: pg_depend
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSO.4.10.10107161836180.30275-100000@spider.pilosoft.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_depend  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Alex Pilosov writes:
> 
> > > I'm not so convinced on that idea.  Assume you're dropping object foo.
> > > You look at pg_depend and see that objects 145928, 264792, and 1893723
> > > depend on it.  Great, what do you do now?
> > I believe someone else previously suggested this:
> >
> > drop <type> object [RESTRICT | CASCADE]
> >
> > to make use of dependency info.
> 
> That was me.  The point, however, was, given object id 145928, how the
> heck to you know what table this comes from?

have a view pg_objecttype which is a UNION across all the [relevant]
system tables sounds fine to me, but maybe I'm missing something?





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_depend
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_depend