AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherite d from template1

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Philip Warner'" <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherite d from template1
Date: 2000-11-09 08:08:56
Message-ID: 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA6879633680FE@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> >Do we still need the lastsysoid column in pg_database if we do things
> >this way? Seems like what you really want is to suppress all the
> >objects that are in template0, so you really only need one lastsysoid
> >value, namely template0's. The other entries are useless AFAICS.

> Where would you store the value if not in pg_database?

Would probably best be a fixed value, that leaves room for modifications in
template0, that might be necessary for new versions.

This oid would have to be explicitly set as last step of initdb.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karel Zak 2000-11-09 08:23:41 Re: AW: Re: [GENERAL] Query caching
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB 2000-11-09 07:59:41 AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherite d from template1