On 2021-Jun-09, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 12:44:42PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: > > I confirm that the bug still exists in master (be57f216). The patch > > fixes it and looks good to me. I changed the wording a little and > > added a regression test. The updated patch is in the attachment. I > > added this thread to the CF and updated the status to "Ready for > > Committer". > > FWIW, that looks rather natural to me to me to just ignore the object > if it has already been dropped here. The same kind of rules apply to > tables dropped with DROP TABLE which would not show up as of > pg_event_trigger_ddl_commands(), but one can get a list as of > pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects().
Oh, that parallel didn't occur to me. I agree it seems a useful precedent. > Alvaro, were you planning to look at that? I have not looked at the > patch in details. I have it on my list of things to look at, but it isn't priority. If you to mess with it, please be my guest. > missing_ok is available in getObjectIdentity() only > since v14, so this cannot be backpatched :/ Ooh, yeah, I forgot about that. And that one was pretty invasive ... I'm not sure if we can reasonably implement a fix for older releases. I mean, it's a relatively easy test: do a syscache search for the object or a catalog indexscan (easy to do with get_object_property_data-based API), and if the object is gone, skip getObjectTypeDescription and getObjectIdentity. But maybe this is too much code to add to stable releases ... -- Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile