Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1snv3j-006wiM-KW
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:13:08 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1snv3j-008Inm-4H
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:13:07 +0000
Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <depesz@depesz.com>)
	id 1snv3i-008Ine-RP
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:13:06 +0000
Received: from lana.depesz.com ([88.198.49.178] helo=depesz.com)
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <depesz@depesz.com>)
	id 1snv3b-000Qvg-No
	for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:13:06 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=depesz.com;
	s=20170201; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Reply-To:
	Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:Sender:From:Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:
	Content-ID:Content-Description;
	bh=SqlJMm3wRv8/DeVxTE0D018Tz5aDYTczgoj6zLi8De4=; b=O1cCI3GRjupiRnivpAXfCDlF/Q
	lrpVeYZtff0OKJ3JfacACn7+VhzCLeajnh5feBNL/bbK3/rLD6DycQGwg2j2sr8efdMZHsA2v2Gi1
	xk1Vcum0khtVRqHlzY+66J1k3z3TiRqymNnk57YXnzVcsjQPwipNQKwGriniuwkvl0fY=;
Received: from depesz by depesz.com with local (Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <depesz@depesz.com>)
	id 1snv3c-008CkD-0m;
	Tue, 10 Sep 2024 09:13:00 +0200
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 09:13:00 +0200
From: hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com>
Sender: depesz@depesz.com
To: Sanskar Agrawal <sanskar@flintk12.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs mailing list <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BUG #18607: UNION ALL discards all foreign key relations +
 indexes
Message-ID: <Zt_xfCSMgpVoxggF@depesz.com>
Reply-To: depesz@depesz.com
References: <18607-651aa996c1e71d48@postgresql.org>
 <Zt_wyM5koKKmOmdn@depesz.com>
 <CAL9bbZquC=BZa61TSHgX7vXjMN7BWtEgOCuzM8gwbn0jD3uvLg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAL9bbZquC=BZa61TSHgX7vXjMN7BWtEgOCuzM8gwbn0jD3uvLg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: <pgsql-bugs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-bugs>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Zt_xfCSMgpVoxggF%40depesz.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 12:41:14PM +0530, Sanskar Agrawal wrote:
> Yes consider a small table as users with users.id as primary key,
> 
> took two rows from the same and ran a union all it tends to drop the
> indexes + foreign relations

Please show full example that I can run on empty DB.

Set of create table statement(s), adding indexes, foreign keys, and then
create view, that results in dropped indexes/foreign keys.

Best regards,

depesz