Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit
Date: 2002-06-14 13:24:28
Message-ID: 5680.1024061068@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

"Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>> I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it=20
>> but Dave's first cut wasn't right.

> Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing
> function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not).
> I remembered the docs as well this time :-)

This looks good --- but Bruce, when you apply it don't forget to bump
catversion.h.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Snyder 2002-06-14 14:10:21 Re: guc.c and postgresql.conf.sample constistency check
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-06-14 13:22:46 Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit