| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE SCHEMA ... CREATE DOMAIN support |
| Date: | 2026-09-09 16:17:13 |
| Message-ID: | aqGGiZfONuhkd25F@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 06:53:58PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 04/09/2026 22:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, you have a point. There's pretty nearly nothing that's
>> well-designed about CREATE SCHEMA subcommands: as you say, the syntax
>> is shaky, and the namespace visible to subcommands is unclear, and
>> the whole business of re-ordering subcommands is debatable, and even
>> if all those things were fixed the benefit of the entire feature is
>> marginal. So maybe we should just say that our legacy implementation
>> is what it is and we will mark it deprecated rather than putting any
>> effort into improving it. I'd like to see more than one vote in favor
>> of that before I do it, though.
>
> Reverting seems like the safest thing to do. This is a really niche thing,
> but whatever behavior we pick, we'll be stuck with it for a long time. If
> we're not 100% certain about the new behavior, better to take a step back
> and discuss and design it with more time.
+1
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2026-09-09 16:24:32 | Re: pg_get_*_ddl() needs a redesign |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2026-09-09 15:53:58 | Re: CREATE SCHEMA ... CREATE DOMAIN support |