Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think Andreas is trying to argue that if you drop column b from index
(a, b) that the index should be converted into index(a) -- assuming of
course there isn't already an index(a).
That seems to be well outside the charter of DROP CASCADE. I think we
either drop or don't drop; we don't go building new indexes, which is
what this would take. There are also definitional problems --- for
instance, if the index is UNIQUE, does it transmogrify into a UNIQUE
constraint on A alone (which would most likely fail)?
Agreed, auto creation wouldn't be necessary/expected. If you drop, objects disappear, you don't expect them to morph. But I'd like to be inhibited to drop the column if it requires a somewhat recreated index on (a). So IMHO a DROP INDEX [RESTRICT] should drop only dependent objects if this won't affect others.
Regards, Andreas
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
