On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: > On 29 February 2012 17:16, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> writes: >>> So could we introduce either a command to show which objects are owned >>> by a particular role, or allow a dry-run of DROP OWNED BY? >> >> It's always been possible to do that: >> >> begin; >> drop owned by joe; >> rollback; >> >> I believe this is already the recommended approach if you're concerned >> about what DROP CASCADE will do. > > No, the cascade part is fine. It's the objects which won't cause a > cascade that are an issue. Putting it in a transaction for rolling > back doesn't help find out what it intends to drop. > > How can the user tell what the statement would drop (ignoring cascades)?
It's certainly possible to write a query for this, but I think this gets back to the old argument about whether every client (and every end-user) should be required to reimplement this, or whether maybe we ought to provide some server functionality around it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
