From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: More schema queries |
Date: | 2002-05-21 19:24:46 |
Message-ID: | D85C66DA59BA044EB96AB9683819CF6101509B@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 21 May 2002 20:09
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries
>
>
> I guess your version of getopt() won't cooperate with --
> switches. I've committed this change in CVS.
Thanks.
>
> I'm still interested in why explicitly saying "create view
> pg_catalog.foo" didn't work ...
I've just been playing with this as you suggested, and using an initdb
with both 'create view foo' and 'create view pg_catalog.bar', with the
-- style switch I get (for both types of view):
namespace_search_path = $user,public
newRelation->schemaname = null
namespaceId = 2200 (public)
So I guess the problem is a combination of the getopt() that we've
already found, and schemaname being null in the newRelation structure.
Using the -c style switch in PGSQL_OPTS gives namespace_search_path =
pg_catalog as expected.
I am interested in learning more about this so any pointers you might
offer would be useful (I seriously doubt I'd find the fault myself
though) but I do understand that you probably have better things to do
than help me begin to understand the internals so I won't be overly
offended if you don't have time :-)
Cheers, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-21 19:31:05 | Re: More schema queries |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-05-21 19:19:16 | Re: Is 7.3 a good time to increase NAMEDATALEN ? |