Re: adminpack and pg_catalog

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: adminpack and pg_catalog
Date: 2006-10-20 04:44:11
Message-ID: 20061020044411.GS26892@nasby.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 02:37:34PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote:
> Why does adminpack install functions into pg_catalog? This is
> inconsistent with the rest of the contrib/ packages, not to mention the
> definition of pg_catalog itself (which ought to hold builtin object
> definitions). And as AndrewSN pointed out on IRC, it also breaks
> pg_dump.

When we wrote newsysviews we faced the same dilema of where to put
things. We ultimately decided on a pg_ schema in the hope that no one
else would use that name (we also prefaced everything in the schema with
pg_, but a big reason for that was potential inclusion into core).
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2006-10-20 04:52:51 Re: adminpack and pg_catalog
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-10-20 03:52:27 Re: Statements with syntax errors are not logged