Hm ... seems like that requires more special cases, not fewer.
What I was imagining was the current database-local pg_description plus
a single shared table pg_shared_description. When you add more kinds of
shared objects (SQL roles maybe?) obj_description doesn't need to
change...
Oh yeah, that's
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Perhaps we should think about creating a shared version of
>> pg_description so we could have more reasonable support for comments
>> on shared objects. I'm not in a hurry for this but it would be a
>> reasonable TODO item.
> Just add a comme
Well, it has the same issues as COMMENT ON DATABASE, which we support,
though crudely.
Perhaps we should think about creating a shared version of
pg_description so we could have more reasonable support for comments
on shared objects. I'm not in a hurry for this but it would be a
reasonable TODO it
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Comment on TABLESPACE is impossible, no? Tablespaces are a global
relation and pg_description isn't.
Well, it has the same issues as COMMENT ON DATABASE, which we support,
though crudely.
Perhaps we should think about cre
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Comment on TABLESPACE is impossible, no? Tablespaces are a global
> relation and pg_description isn't.
Well, it has the same issues as COMMENT ON DATABASE, which we support,
though crudely.
Perhaps we should think about creating a shared ver
(Moved to -hackers)
Log Message:
---
Tablespaces. Alternate database locations are dead, long live tablespaces.
Sweet :)
There are various things left to do: contrib dbsize and oid2name modules
need work, and so does the documentation. Also someone should think about
COMMENT ON TABLESPACE
