| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb |
| Date: | 2005-06-20 09:26:42 |
| Message-ID: | 42B68BD2.4070700@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
>>
>>> Can't tell whether I could find time for reviewing the docs the next
>>> days (more interesting for feature freeze is having fixed the
>>> implementation anyway).
>>
>>
>>
>> Of the sixty-odd files that mention template1 in current CVS, only about
>> half are documentation.
>
>
> The decision which files should be changed must be taken. e.g.
> createdb, dropdb will use template1 hardcoded. Is it acceptable that
> those tools fail if the "postgres" database isn't present any more?
>
>
How about template1 as a fallback?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2005-06-20 09:36:47 | Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2005-06-20 09:21:25 | Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb |