Re: Patch: forcing object owner in TOC file

From: Piotr Gasidło <quaker(at)barbara(dot)eu(dot)org>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch: forcing object owner in TOC file
Date: 2012-10-15 14:58:33
Message-ID: CAF8akQvLogYnA4wcDSa_X56-DRu-DW29AM7-arLbKZrBznBhqw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2012/10/15 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
> Sorry, but this doesn't strike me as a very good idea at all. Why not just
> alter the table ownership after the restore is done?

Yes, I could restore, wrote later ALTER ... OWNER TO ... - but this
method allowed me to do it quicker.

> If we start allowing
> stuff other than the TOC ID to be specified in the list file the
> modifications will never end.

Understood, sounds reasonably.

> BTW, I realize your patch is small, but it's usually a good idea to discuss
> an idea on the mailing list before sending in a patch.

I've new here, next time I will send idea and wait for response before
sending any patch.

--
Piotr Gasidło

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2012-10-15 15:18:15 Re: Deprecating RULES
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2012-10-15 14:55:36 Re: Truncate if exists