From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
Cc: | "Hackers List" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump DROP commands and implicit search paths |
Date: | 2002-05-14 01:24:20 |
Message-ID: | 21800.1021339460@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> writes:
> ... Based on the assumption a DROP SCHEMA statement will also
> be issued.
Doesn't seem very workable for the public schema. I suspect pg_dump
has to special-case public anyway, to some extent, but this doesn't
really get us around the DROP problem for individual objects AFAICS.
I agree that if we issue a drop for the schema there's no need to
drop the individual objects ... but we aren't going to be issuing
any drops for public IMHO ... so we still need a solution that
supports dropping individual objects.
If we assume that schema retargeting is something that should be
done by a pg_restore option, then it'd probably be workable for
pg_restore to modify the qualified DROP commands as it issues them.
The main thing is to keep the explicit schema references out of the
CREATE commands, and that part I think is doable.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2002-05-14 01:29:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2002-05-14 01:08:53 | Re: pg_dump DROP commands and implicit search paths |