Re: Schema version management

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Schema version management
Date: 2012-07-06 12:23:26
Message-ID: m2k3yhw01t.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> This argument seems a bit irrelevant to me. pg_dump doesn't get to pick
> and choose what will be in the database it's told to dump. If we're

Sure.

> going to do something like what Joel wants, we have to have file naming
> conventions for operator and cast objects. So we can't just leave them
> out of the conversation (or if we do, we shouldn't be surprised when the
> ensuing design sucks).

I guess what we're saying is that at this point we can pick non user
friendly naming rules, like pg_operator/<oid>.sql or something like
that, OID based. Impacted users might as well learn about extensions.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-07-06 13:01:31 Re: Schema version management
Previous Message Joel Jacobson 2012-07-06 12:04:24 Re: [PATCH] pg_dump: Sort overloaded functions in deterministic order