Re: What's the CURRENT schema ?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: What's the CURRENT schema ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 27412.1017953104@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: What's the CURRENT schema ? (Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Actually that was my initial choice of name, but I changed my mind >> later. The reason is that the dbadmin should be able to restrict or >> even delete the public namespace if his usage plans for the database >> don't allow any shared objects. > Can't we prevent creation in there by (un)setting permissions? That was what I was referring to by "restrict" ... but ISTM we should allow dropping the namespace too. Why waste cycles searching it if you don't want to use it? > There should be a more practical way of making it empty than having to > drop > each object individually (DROP will drop the contents but refuse to > delete > the schema itself as it is a pg_ one?). I'd expect DROP on a reserved namespace to error out, and thus do nothing at all. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: