Re: Another thought about search_path semantics

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Another thought about search_path semantics
Date: 2014-04-04 20:43:07
Message-ID: 20140404204307.GA13431@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-04-04 14:56:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > I was actually suggesting that the only way to create something in
> > pg_catalog is to do it with a explicit schema qualified id. I realize
> > that that's not something backpatchable...
>
> I don't find that to be a good idea at all. pg_dump is probably not the
> only code that believes it can select a creation target with search_path,
> no matter what that target is.

Sure, but how many of those are trying to put things in pg_catalog?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-04-04 20:57:54 Re: Using indices for UNION.
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2014-04-04 20:39:03 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add ALTER TABLESPACE ... MOVE command