Re: ALTER TABLESPACE ... MOVE ALL TO ...
От | Stephen Frost |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ALTER TABLESPACE ... MOVE ALL TO ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140120144651.GJ31026@tamriel.snowman.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ALTER TABLESPACE ... MOVE ALL TO ... (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: ALTER TABLESPACE ... MOVE ALL TO ...
Re: ALTER TABLESPACE ... MOVE ALL TO ... |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Simon Riggs (simon@2ndQuadrant.com) wrote: > Not a good argument since IN CURRENT DATABASE applies to all SQL > commands, so would clearly be unnecessary. I suppose it depends on how you're looking at it. ALTER TABLESPACE ... RENAME, for example, updates a shared catalog and therefore the change is seen across all databases. That's not exactly "IN CURRENT DATABASE". > At the moment, ALL does not include all objects. It's a POLA violation > to have a command affect just some objects and not others. That is > especially confusing when the command run as Superuser *will* move all > objects and a RC of zero has different meaning dependent upon who the > user is that executes the command. So you're still looking for an 'OWNED' noise word to be added? Also, I did add the ability to specify types of objects (it's often that we'll have a "INDEXES" tablespace, so this made sense), so how about: ALTER TABLESPACE name MOVE OWNED TO name opt_nowait ALTER TABLESPACE name MOVE TABLES OWNED TO name opt_nowait ALTER TABLESPACE name MOVE INDEXES OWNED TO name opt_nowait ALTER TABLESPACE name MOVE MATERIALIZED VIEWS OWNED TO name opt_nowait Removing the 'ALL' entirely? Should there be an "OWNED BY name_list" option also, since that's how we use 'OWNED' elsewhere? Should the use of "OWNED" elsewhere (eg: REASSIGN OWNED BY) also support just 'OWNED' to mean the current role (I'm not entirely sure how much sense that makes, but figured I'd ask). Thanks, Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: