TBH, this sounds like a completely terrible idea.  There are far too many
sorts of dependencies across which one would not expect ownership to
propagate; for example, use of a function in a view, or even just a
foreign key dependency between two tables.

I'm not even clear that there are *any* cases where this behavior is
wanted, other than perhaps ALTER OWNER on an extension --- and even there,
what you would want is altering the ownership of the member objects, but
not everything that depends on the member objects.

So basically, a generic CASCADE facility sounds like a lot of work to
produce something that would seldom be anything but a foot-gun.

DELETE FROM or TRUNCATE could be a foot-gun too, but it's not a reason to remove tham. I faced with problem when I tried to change owner of datadase with all objects inside. Think, this feature could be useful although it should restricted to superuser obly.

Teodor Sigaev                                   E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru
                                                   WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to