Re: search_path vs extensions
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: search_path vs extensions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4A1EE6CE.1010807@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: search_path vs extensions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: search_path vs extensions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > >> It also seems to me that we're getting seriously sidetracked from the >> dependency-tracking part of this project which seems to me to be a >> much deeper and more fundamental issue. >> > > I thought that part was a pretty simple problem, actually. Have an > object representing the module, make sure each component object in the > module has an AUTO dependency link to that object. Where's the > difficulty? > > > Well, yes. Honestly, I think all this search_path stuff is a red herring. We are once again in danger of over-designing this instead of doing the simple thing first (namely, don't worry about the search_path). cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: