Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: todo: comment field for pg users and groups

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: todo: comment field for pg users and groups
Date: 2004-09-22 14:11:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Dear Alvaro,

>> Thus I would suggest to add one new text field in pg_group and pg_shadow
>> for this purpose, that could be initialized with something like:
>> 	CREATE USER calvin COMMENT 'Calvin <calvin(at)comics(dot)org>';
>> Alternatively, it could be managed with "COMMENT ON ..."? Well, users or
>> groups are not really database objects... so it does not really fit.
> One problem is that pg_comment, where comments are held, is not a shared
> relation.  So if comments are stored there, they would not show up in
> other databases if you change, drop or add them.

Ok. This is the rationnal for users not to have comments.

> The same applies to databases and tablespaces, and that's why there's a 
> warning emitted when you add a comment to a database.

Argh... Indeed non-shared comments on shared objects are not so useful.

> There have been noises of adding a new catalog for keeping comments for
> shared objects (which would itself be shared, of course). I'm not sure
> what the rationale is for not putting them in the pg_shadow catalog.

Well, if there is a "shared" comment infrastructure that would be nice 
indeed. I now see the todo item about "shared" comments. So the todo
is not needed... but just the implementation!

Thanks for your answer,

Fabien Coelho - coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-09-22 14:12:44
Subject: Re: elog in 7.4
Previous:From: MeskesDate: 2004-09-22 13:20:10
Subject: Re:

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group