Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil.sonta...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> Shouldn't the drop cascade have deleted comptype2 itself, instead of just >> deleting the dependent column? Or this is the expected intentional >> behaviour?
In the case of a table it's certainly the desired behavior that only the column and not the whole table goes away. I don't see why composite types should act differently. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers