Re: Schema version management - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Schema version management
Date
Msg-id 26673.1341503949@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Schema version management  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Schema version management  (Joel Jacobson <joel@trustly.com>)
Re: Schema version management  (Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Michael Glaesemann's message of jue jul 05 11:36:51 -0400 2012:
>> If we're dumping objects (tables, views, functions, what-have-you) into separate files,
>> each of these functions is a separate object and should be in its own file.

> Clearly there is no consensus here.

FWIW, I'm attracted to the all-similarly-named-functions-together
method, mainly because it dodges the problem of how to encode a
function's argument list into a filename.  However, we're being
short-sighted to only think of functions here.  What about operators?
Or casts?  Those don't have simple names either.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Glaesemann
Date:
Subject: Re: Schema version management
Next
From: Joel Jacobson
Date:
Subject: Re: Schema version management