| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Kuhn, Dylan K (4520500D)" <Dylan(dot)Kuhn(at)navy(dot)mil> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, tom(at)demayfamily(dot)net |
| Subject: | Re: Comment on Database and Admin Metadata |
| Date: | 2003-05-14 16:46:31 |
| Message-ID: | 25107.1052930791@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
"Kuhn, Dylan K (4520500D)" <Dylan(dot)Kuhn(at)navy(dot)mil> writes:
> We are storing some metadata about a database in the database comment. In =
> short my question is, is there a better place?
I'd suggest making a "control table" in each database that stores
whatever you need. The database comment is only one field, but a
control table could be extended limitlessly.
> Bug #880 (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2003-01/msg00131.php) d=
> iscusses some of the problems with comments on databases.
AFAIK, no one has any plans to change the handling of comments.
Certainly it's not a very high-priority item.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-05-14 16:48:20 | Re: eRserver |
| Previous Message | David F. Skoll | 2003-05-14 16:30:43 | Re: Comment on Database and Admin Metadata |