This makes the most sense. One could assume a user who doesn't have
access to a particular database shouldn't know what it's for either.
So making the comments global could be problematic in some cases.
I'll enforce this and send in a patch.
--
Rod
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Rod Taylor" <rbt@zort.ca>; "Hackers List"
<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 2:49 PM
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Really annoying comments...
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > Sent: 21 April 2002 19:45
> > To: Dave Page
> > Cc: Rod Taylor; Hackers List
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Really annoying comments...
> >
> >
> > Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
> > >> I'm more inclined to rip it out ;-).
> >
> > > Eeep! pgAdmin handles comments coming from multiple
pg_description
> > > tables and it works very well (IMHO) in the pgAdmin UI. By
> > all means
> > > make them work more sensibly in whatever way seems most
> > appropriate -
> > > I'll fix pgAdmin to handle it, but don't just rip them out
please!!
> >
> > Well, it would seem like the only sensible rule would be to
> > allow COMMENT ON DATABASE only for the *current* database.
> > Then at least you know which DB to look in.
>
> That wouldn't cause me any pain - in pgAdmin the comment is just a
property
> of a pgDatabase object - if you modify it, it will always be set
through a
> connection to that database.
>
> Regards, Dave.
>
