From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_class changes for group ownership |
Date: | 2004-12-29 18:41:57 |
Message-ID: | 20041229184156.GD10437@ns.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > Ah, alright, sounds good to me. I'll look into making them share a
> > common unique identifier space, that shouldn't be too difficult. Of
> > course, that'll require a dump/restore, I expect.. I don't suppose that
> > could possibly happen before 8.0, eh? :)
>
> Changing pg_class would have the same problem ...
Well, yes, but that's no longer the issue. I guess my thought was that
if we could get the common id space change in before 8.0 then group
ownership could possibly be introduced in 8.1 w/o having to do a
dump/restore. I'm still relatively new to Postgres, is it normal to
require a dump/restore between semi-major (8.0 to 8.1) revisions? If so
then it doesn't matter since I wouldn't expect group ownership to be
introduced prior to 8.1 (at the earliest..) anyway.
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-12-29 18:54:52 | Re: pg_class changes for group ownership |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-12-29 18:13:03 | Re: pg_class changes for group ownership |