> On 11 September 2017 at 23:45, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On 11 September 2017 at 23:19, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Uh, what? Sure you can. Just because the existing code never has a > >> reason to create such a dependency doesn't mean it wouldn't work. > > > Well, I thought that `pg_depend` was not intended to be used from > > user-defined code and it's something "internal". > > Well, no, we're not expecting that SQL code will manually insert rows > there. This feature should have some sort of SQL command that will > set up the relevant catalog entries, including the dependencies. > If you don't want to do that, you're going to need the runtime tests.
Sure, an SQL command for that purpose is much better than a runtime check. I'm going to add such command to the patch, thank you for the information!
