Re: contrib/snapshot
| От | Joel Jacobson |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: contrib/snapshot |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTi=t7mEazLezGgs1ECN0Vhbhu8o5O59ri7opnTeX@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: contrib/snapshot (Joel Jacobson <joel@gluefinance.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: contrib/snapshot
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
2011/1/3 Joel Jacobson <joel@gluefinance.com>
2011/1/2 Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>Is it actually limited to functions? ISTM this concept would be valuable for anything that's not in pg_class (in other words, anything that doesn't have user data in it).Instead of limiting the support to functions, perhaps it would make more sense to limit it to all non-data objects?Is there a term for the group of object types not carrying any user data?
My bad, I see you already answered both my questions.
So, it does make sense, and the term for non-data object types is therefore non-pg_class, non-class or perhaps non-relation objects?
Best regards,
Joel Jacobson
Glue Finance
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: