On 5/28/09 12:36 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> That really seems exactly to be what we're proposing with pre_ and post_
> search_path components: don't change current meaning of search_path,
> just give DBAs better ways to manage it. And now that you're leaning
> towards a search_path suffix, don't you want a prefix too?
Yeah, I thought about a prefix, but I couldn't come up with a way it
would be useful, and I could come up with a lot of scenarios where it
would be a big foot-gun.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
