Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bYJ7v-00021i-FQ for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 20:32:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bYJ7u-0000Hw-7e for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 20:32:22 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bYJ7t-0000H0-1Y for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 20:32:21 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bYJ7q-0003lm-6Q for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 20:32:20 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u7CKWBns013205; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:32:11 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: "David G. Johnston" cc: Vik Fearing , Peter Eisentraut , denisa.cirstescu@asentinel.com, "pgsql-docs@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Undocumented behavior od DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE In-reply-to: <25576.1471010504@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <20160805104837.1412.84915@wrigleys.postgresql.org> <7aeb5291-b9ca-3a3c-0bd8-e60b56ec2693@2ndquadrant.fr> <25576.1471010504@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Tom Lane message dated "Fri, 12 Aug 2016 10:01:44 -0400" Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:32:11 -0400 Message-ID: <13204.1471033931@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-docs Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org I wrote: > If we're going to add a warning about CASCADE being recursive, it would > logically need to be added to every last DROP command that has a CASCADE > option, which is most of them. I don't necessarily object to that, but > we'd need a more boiler-plate, copy-and-pasteable phrasing. > ... > I'm inclined to suggest that maybe the generic phrasing could be > "Automatically drop objects that depend on the [(such as ...)], > and in turn all objects that depend on those objects". Not hearing any alternative suggestions, I'm going to go do something like the above. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs