Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema
От | Dimitri Fontaine |
---|---|
Тема | Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m2k3rgye7c.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > "Break"? You can't possibly think that's a good idea. I don't think it is. It's been used as a hack mainly before we had per-user and per-database settings, from what I've seen. > Right, that is the argument for ignoring missing schemas, and I think it > is entirely sensible for *search* activities. But allowing *creation* > to occur in an indeterminate schema is a horrid idea. It's not so much indeterminate for the user, even if I understand why you say that. Creating new schemas is not done lightly in such cases… But well, the solution is simple enough in that case. Use the newer form ALTER ROLE foo IN DATABASE db1 SET search_path TO some, value; So I'm fine with that change in fact. Is it possible to extend the release notes to include so many details about it, as I don't think anyone will get much excited to report that as a HINT when the conditions are met… (although it might be simple enough thanks to the pg_setting view). Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: