On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
<fabriziome...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > If we ever implement something like
>> >> >
>> >> > COMMENT ON CURRENT_DATABASE IS ...
>> >> >
>> >> > it will be useful, because you will be able to restore a dump into
>> >> > another database and have the comment apply to the target database.
>> >
>> > I think it's simple to implement, but how about pg_dump... we need to
>> > add
>> > new option (like --use-current-database) or am I missing something ?
>>
>> I think we'd just change it to use the new syntax, full stop. I see
>> no need for an option.
>
> I'm returning on this...
>
> What's the reasonable syntaxes?
>
> COMMENT ON CURRENT DATABASE IS 'text';
>
> or
>
> COMMENT ON DATABASE { CURRENT_DATABASE | object_name } IS 'text';
The second one would require making CURRENT_DATABASE a reserved
keyword, and I'm not keen to create any more of those. I like the
first one. The other alternative that may be worth considering is:
COMMENT ON CURRENT_DATABASE IS 'text';
That doesn't require making CURRENT_DATABASE a reserved keyword, but
it does require making it a keyword, and it doesn't look very SQL-ish.
Still, we have a bunch of other CURRENT_FOO keywords.
But I'm inclined to stick with your first proposal.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
