Re: [ADMIN] Schema comparisons

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mark Lubratt <mark(dot)lubratt(at)indeq(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Schema comparisons
Date: 2004-02-29 14:08:07
Message-ID: 200402291408.07797.dev@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers

On Sunday 29 February 2004 02:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> > I've been looking at storing $REVISION$ in comments for each object, so
> > my install scripts can halt if there is a problem. Not wanting to use my
> > only comment slot for this I was thinking about an extension to the
> > COMMENT ON statement:
> > COMMENT ON TABLE foo IS 'This is where I stroe my foos.';
> > COMMENT ON TABLE foo SECTION 'default' IS 'I meant store my foos.';
> > COMMENT ON TABLE foo SECTION 'revision' IS '1.19';
> > COMMENT ON TABLE foo SECTION 'bar' IS 'baz';
>
> This seems a little, um, specialized. Why don't you just keep the info
> in a user-defined table?

For the same reasons you don't store existing comments in a user-defined
table:
1. It's convenient to have a standard (across providers) place for them.
2. It's meta-data, not data.
3. It gets dumped along with my table.

If it's just a case of "looks like a waste of time" then I might well waste my
time and do it. On the other hand, if it's a case of "unnecessary
complication - don't want it in the code" then I'll not bother.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Treat 2004-02-29 16:59:37 Re: [ADMIN] Schema comparisons
Previous Message Tim Larson 2004-02-29 03:22:44 Re: [ADMIN] Schema comparisons

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2004-02-29 14:15:57 Re: Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-02-29 13:19:03 Re: log_line_info