On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Oh. This is more complicated than it appeared on the surface. It
>> seems that the string "BLOB COMMENTS" actually gets inserted into
>> custom dumps somewhere, so I'm not sure whether we can just change it.
>> Was this issue discussed at some point before this was committed?
>> Changing it would seem to require inserting some backward
>> compatibility code here. Another option would be to add a separate
>> section for "BLOB METADATA", and leave "BLOB COMMENTS" alone. Can
>> anyone comment on what the Right Thing To Do is here?
> The BLOB COMMENTS label is, or was, correct for what it contained.
> If this patch has usurped it to contain other things
> I would argue
> that that is seriously wrong. pg_dump already has a clear notion
> of how to handle ACLs for objects. ACLs for blobs ought to be
> made to fit into that structure, not dumped in some random place
> because that saved a few lines of code.
OK. Hopefully KaiGai or Takahiro can suggest a fix.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2009-12-19 03:15:50|
|Subject: Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)|
|Previous:||From: suzhiyang||Date: 2009-12-19 02:58:21|
|Subject: About "Allow VIEW/RULE recompilation when the underlying tables change"|