Re: Information_schema fixes for sequences and temporary tables

Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> writes:
> More to come, but these two are probably worth backpatching.

We can't really backpatch changes to information_schema, since we can't
force initdb in back branches.

I'd be interested to see you cite chapter and verse in the SQL spec
where it says that information_schema should hide temp tables of
other backends. That change seems pretty dubious to me. (More
likely, we should be adding tests on whether the caller has USAGE
privilege on the table's containing schema.)

As for all that ESCAPE junk, consider using regexps instead; they
play nicer with underscores in patterns.

regards, tom lane