Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> It'd be better to invent inverse pg_get_comment and pg_set_comment
>> functions, then you could do bulk-update things like
>> select pg_set_comment('table', pg_get_comment('table') || ' more')
>> from pg_class where ...
> Of course, once we start thinking about what kind of comments people
> might be interested in, as alluded to elsewhere, it's entirely likely
> they'll want to get things like timestamps included and other
> information that, ultimately, would be better if it was structured and
> not just thrown together into a free-form text field.
It's not hard to imagine people deciding that all their comments will
be (the text form of) JSON objects containing certain fields. But
I don't think it's appropriate for us to mandate that sort of thing.
Given get/set comment functions as above, users could write wrapper
functions implementing their local conventions.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
