2012/10/2 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> Excerpts from Andrew Dunstan's message of mar oct 02 17:24:38 -0300 2012:
> > On 10/02/2012 03:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > >> Well, if that's the rationale then you end up with no schema foo at
> > >> (i.e. both die), which seems even more surprising (though I admit it
> > >> the advantage of being a simple rule to document.)
> > > I think we should just disallow putting any contained objects in the
> > > statement when IF NOT EXISTS is used. It's simple to understand,
> > > to document and implement, and I think it covers all the sane use-cases
> > > anyway.
> > I thought we'd already agreed on this.
> Well, it's not what the latest proposed patch implements.
You're right... the latest proposed patch don't implements it.
I'll change the patch and send soon...
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Stirling Newberry||Date: 2012-10-02 22:58:12|
|Subject: Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS|
|Previous:||From: Martijn van Oosterhout||Date: 2012-10-02 21:09:02|
|Subject: Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements|