| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Chatter on DROP SOMETHING IF EXISTS |
| Date: | 2007-02-19 15:14:54 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0702190714m3e40b82qd6f0c016c9bd52ce@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/19/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Am Montag, 19. Februar 2007 13:12 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
> >> I don't understand -- what problem you got with "NO OPERATION"? It
> >> seemed a sound idea to me.
>
> > It seems nonorthogonal. What if only some of the tables you mentioned
> did not
> > exist? Do you get "SOME OPERATION"?
>
> I'd say you get DROP TABLE as long as at least one table was dropped.
>
>
How about DROP TABLE <cnt> where 'cnt' is the number of tables dropped ?
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-02-19 15:18:59 | Re: New feature request: FlashBack Query |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-19 15:10:53 | Re: RFC: Temporal Extensions for PostgreSQL |