Dave Page wrote:
>
>>
>> 1.5 *does* delete the values, but wx will read a non-existent value
>> as empty and recreate it.
>
>
> Because the count value still read 12 or whatever I guess.
Yup.
> Do we still need the count in the new scheme? Can't we just iterate
> through all the subkeys?
We'd have to delete entries if servers are removed from the tree. I can
remember incidents where count was corrupted (for whatever reason) and
no servers where displayed, but the registry was still there so it was
sufficient to increase the count.
>
>> Any suggestions? We could copy them over, if newer don't exist, and
>> leave the old ones. But this would leave quite some (pre-1.5)
>> garbage.
>
>
> I'm not convinced it was actually worth the change - it's not like it
> was something that the user needed to hack normally, or would cause
> performance issues.
If you add a schema restriction you'll understand why I did this.
Alternatively, we could try to convince Tom to extend pg_database and
pg_schema :-)
Regards,
Andreas
