Re: object description for FDW user mappings

From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: object description for FDW user mappings
Date: 2015-03-06 00:22:13
Message-ID: 54F8F335.2010403@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 06-03-2015 AM 09:18, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 06-03-2015 AM 01:32, Tom Lane wrote:

>> +1 for the concept, but to be nitpicky, "in" doesn't seem like the right
>> word here. "on server" would read better to me; or perhaps "at server".
>>
>
> One more option may be "for server" (reading the doc for CREATE USER MAPPING)

Oh, I see it's been done that way already.

Thanks,
Amit

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-03-06 00:28:33 Rethinking pg_dump's function sorting code
Previous Message Amit Langote 2015-03-06 00:18:36 Re: object description for FDW user mappings