| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Subject: | Re: search_path vs extensions |
| Date: | 2009-05-29 16:23:26 |
| Message-ID: | C3A586B5-BDE9-4FAF-8339-C23D6C4BD286@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On May 29, 2009, at 3:38 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> PS: we still have to provide users with easy tools to (dynamically)
> manage search_path, don't we?
> (I prefer not to start the search_path management tool ideas right
> here).
Yes, we do, and that's what at least half this thread is about.
Whether or not such tools are put to use for extensions support is a
separate issue, but both need addressing, I think.
Best,
Davdi
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Field | 2009-05-29 16:43:48 | Re: plperl error format vs plpgsql error format vs pgTAP |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2009-05-29 16:22:03 | Re: search_path vs extensions |