Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote: >> I think we should amend the archive tag for these kinds of objects to >> include the table name, so it might look like: >> >> 2153; 2604 39696 DEFAULT public test a rolename
> +1. I noticed that this limitation is present for triggers (as you > mentioned), constraints, fk constraints and RLS policies which should > be completed with a table name.
How can we do this without an archive format version bump ... or were you assuming that that would be an acceptable price? (It's not like we haven't done those before, so maybe it is.)