From: | Piotr Gasidło <quaker(at)barbara(dot)eu(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Patch: forcing object owner in TOC file |
Date: | 2012-10-15 14:58:33 |
Message-ID: | CAF8akQvLogYnA4wcDSa_X56-DRu-DW29AM7-arLbKZrBznBhqw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2012/10/15 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
> Sorry, but this doesn't strike me as a very good idea at all. Why not just
> alter the table ownership after the restore is done?
Yes, I could restore, wrote later ALTER ... OWNER TO ... - but this
method allowed me to do it quicker.
> If we start allowing
> stuff other than the TOC ID to be specified in the list file the
> modifications will never end.
Understood, sounds reasonably.
> BTW, I realize your patch is small, but it's usually a good idea to discuss
> an idea on the mailing list before sending in a patch.
I've new here, next time I will send idea and wait for response before
sending any patch.
--
Piotr Gasidło
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-10-15 15:18:15 | Re: Deprecating RULES |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2012-10-15 14:55:36 | Re: Truncate if exists |