Re: Renaming schema's [SOLVED]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jochem van Dieten <jochemd(at)oli(dot)tudelft(dot)nl>
Cc: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Renaming schema's [SOLVED]
Date: 2002-12-02 14:48:06
Message-ID: 18241.1038840486@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Jochem van Dieten <jochemd(at)oli(dot)tudelft(dot)nl> writes:
> I asked on the pgadmin-support list and Dave Page answered:
> <quote>
> pgAdmin hides system objects by default, but in the case of the public
> schema it makes an exception bcause hiding public would not be sensible.
> It does it by a combination of name and OID: the oid is less than the
> last system oid, so it is hidden, except if it is called public.

Hm. Might I suggest that a better policy (as of 7.3) would be:

1. Schemas (pg_namespace entries) are considered system objects if and
only if their names begin with 'pg_'.

2. For all object types that exist within schemas, it's a system object
if and only if it's within a system schema.

We really want to move away from using OID-range tests for anything...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-12-02 15:01:21 Re: The old "not using index" question
Previous Message Ian Barwick 2002-12-02 14:10:23 Re: German newspaper with PostgreSQL