Excerpts from KaiGai Kohei's message of lun ago 16 00:19:54 -0400 2010: > (2010/08/16 11:50), Robert Haas wrote:
> When we were developing largeobject access controls, Tom Lane commented > as follows: > > * Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Largeobject access controls > http://marc.info/?l=pgsql-hackers&m=125548822906571&w=2 > | I notice that the patch decides to change the pg_description classoid for > | LO comments from pg_largeobject's OID to pg_largeobject_metadata's. This > | will break existing clients that look at pg_description (eg, pg_dump and > | psql, plus any other clients that have any intelligence about comments, > | for instance it probably breaks pgAdmin). And there's just not a lot of > | return that I can see. I agree that using pg_largeobject_metadata would > | be more consistent given the new catalog layout, but I'm inclined to think > | we should stick to the old convention on compatibility grounds. Given > | that choice, for consistency we'd better also use pg_largeobject's OID not > | pg_largeobject_metadata's in pg_shdepend entries for LOs. > > He concerned about existing applications which have knowledge about internal > layout of system catalogs, then I fixed up the patch according to the > suggestion. I think that with this patch we have the return for the change that we didn't have previously. A patch that changes it should also fix pg_dump and psql at the same time, but IMHO it doesn't make sense to keep adding grotty hacks on top of it. Maybe we could do with a grotty hack in obj_description() instead? (...checks...) Oh, it's defined as a SQL function directly in pg_proc.h :-( -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
