From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_am.amowner |
Date: | 2000-06-01 00:01:50 |
Message-ID: | 200006010001.UAA05435@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> It seems that access methods nominally have an "owner", but that owner is
> nowhere else referenced. Since there is no user interface for adding
> access methods anyway, would there be any problems with removing that
> field?
I can't think of a reason not to remove it.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-06-01 00:04:08 | Re: PgAccess - small bug? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-05-31 23:51:42 | pg_am.amowner |