Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D85C66DA59BA044EB96AB9683819CF61015393@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit
Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit |
Список | pgsql-patches |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] > Sent: 14 June 2002 06:25 > To: Bruce Momjian > Cc: Dave Page; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] FW: Patch for current_schemas to > optionally include implicit > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied > patches list at: > > http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches > > I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours. > > I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it > but Dave's first cut wasn't right. Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not). I remembered the docs as well this time :-) BTW: Tom, I noticed that temp schemas get added to the path before pg_catalog - I would have expected pg_catalog to always be first or have I missed something obvious? Regards, Dave.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: