Alvaro Herrera <> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Although I've not done anything about it here, I'm not happy about the
>> handling of dependencies for stats objects.

> Here are two patches regarding handling of dependencies.

Oh, sorry --- I already pushed something about this.

> The first one
> implements your first suggestion: add a NORMAL dependency on each
> column, and do away with RemoveStatisticsExt.  This works well and
> should uncontroversial.

No, I wanted an AUTO dependency there, for exactly the reason you

> If we only do this, then DROP TABLE needs to say CASCADE if there's a
> statistics object in the table.

I don't think we really want that, do we?  A stats object can't be of
any value if the underlying table is gone.  Perhaps that calculus
would change for cross-table stats but I don't see why.

> This seems pointless to me, so the
> second patch throws in an additional dependency on the table as a whole,
> AUTO this time, so that if the table is dropped, the statistics goes
> away without requiring cascade.  There is no point in forcing CASCADE
> for this case, ISTM.  This works well too, but I admit there might be
> resistance to doing it.  OTOH this is how CREATE INDEX works.

Uh, no it isn't.  Indexes have auto dependencies on the individual
columns they index, and *not* on the table as a whole.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to