On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 08:39:09AM +0200, Michael Paesold wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >The other possible solution that comes to mind is to invent the notion
> >that a cast has a specific owner (which arguably it should have anyway)
> >and then say that "system casts" are those whose owner is the original
> >superuser.
>
> Just my toughts: I believe it's better when cast selection does not depend
> on the search_path. It seems dangerous for objects that you don't usually
> qualify with a schema. With all other objects in schemas I can think of,
> you can easily write the full-qualified name.
>
> So I vote for the latter.
So casts created by the original superuser don't get dumped? That's not
good IMHO.
But yes, schema-qualifying casts seems weird:'123'::someschema.user_type
Is that even accepted by the grammar?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[@]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"La fuerza no está en los medios físicos
sino que reside en una voluntad indomable" (Gandhi)
