Nikhil Sontakke <[email protected]> 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 ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
