Re: Bug #880: COMMENT ON DATABASE depends on current database

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bhuvan A <bhuvansql(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug #880: COMMENT ON DATABASE depends on current database
Date: 2003-01-27 21:11:26
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0301272157280.789-100000@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Bruce Momjian writes:

> Do we have psql -l to connect to all the databases to collect comments?
> I guess we could _try_ to connect to as many databases as possible, but
> it seems a little overly complex to me. What do others think?

I tend to think that the functionality to give comments to databases
should either be redone to work right (for example by storing the comment
in a global table (but think about the encoding problems)) or be ripped
out. Right now the feature to give a comment to a database you presumably
already know (since you connected to it) does not seem to justify the
confusion it causes.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-01-27 21:29:52 Re: [BUGS] New hashed IN code ignores distinctiveness of subquery
Previous Message joost 2003-01-27 20:53:27 year and weeknumbers (proposal included)