Message-ID: <c948abd3-7483-473c-a0e7-29c579c823fc@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 10:38:32 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Fix DROP PROPERTY GRAPH "unsupported object class" error
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>,
 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
References: <aej1DkLwhyZWmtxJ@bdtpg> <aem-pjK57peuLI-x@paquier.xyz>
 <CAExHW5vtRyD_kfFP5S6o=+afzpR7Yd7sS=cia_0uHhM3GzLcag@mail.gmail.com>
 <aen77u5go8P7RJaL@bdtpg>
 <CAExHW5vfxVCQFADhiEmi3goyOgGb5qQjURHaM2QDtW6CksUzWA@mail.gmail.com>
 <aet7rawq/V07+H1L@bdtpg>
 <CAExHW5vJGHDXyLDAVC3eJF_ykU73AB9CG6HvJ+WtmO+GE4dnzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <afM8dgqqxsxqmnY7@bdtpg>
 <CAExHW5udMZbMKiQFWB=hDeAK+=t2PXPrmBuscpUc3888kzAi2A@mail.gmail.com>
 <afmHd5vSCJtMFueS@bdtpg>
From: Alex Guo <guo.alex.hengchen@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <afmHd5vSCJtMFueS@bdtpg>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/c948abd3-7483-473c-a0e7-29c579c823fc%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


On 5/5/26 2:00 PM, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 06:01:22PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 4:56 PM Bertrand Drouvot
>> <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I can see the the instability locally with en_US.UTF-8 (gt before _gt) and I
>>> can see that, for example sifaka, has en_US.UTF-8 in locales. So, modifying the
>>> impacted query a bit to add COLLATE "C" in the attached.
>>>
>> I did wonder where the instability is coming from the new query - it's
>> because now we are traversing the entire dependency tree which also
>> contains array type of reltype.
> Right.
>
>> I think we should just eliminate it
>> from the result just like we are eliminating the rule. There is slight
>> convenience in keeping the query as is - it need not change even
>> though the columns returned by the function change and it's more
>> readable. I also think that we don't need a type defined for a
>> property graph - it doesn't contain any row as well as the shape of
>> the result of GRAPH_TABLE depends upon the COLUMNS clause - so that's
>> not fixed as well. I will start a separate thread for that discussion.
> Yeah, now that 891a57c7394 is in, PFA a new version of the patch. This is just
> a mandatory rebase and the COLLATE "C" removals.
>
> Regards,

Thanks for the patch. The patch overall LGTM. There is a typo in the commit message:

"manipulated invdividually through ALTER PROPERTY GRAPH sub-commands. Hence they”

invdividually -> individually

Regards,
Alex Guo