On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 3:38 AM Shay Rojansky <roji@roji.org> wrote:
>> Now, before creating tables, the ORM generates CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS, to ensure that the schema exists before CREATE TABLE; that's reasonable general-purpose behavior.
>
> If the user hasn’t specified they want the schema created it’s arguable that executing create schema anyway is reasonable. The orm user should know whether they are expected/able to create the schema as part of their responsibilities and instruct the orm accordingly and expect it to only create what it has been explicitly directed to create.
I think the point being missed here, is that the user isn't interacting directly with PostgreSQL - they're doing so via an ORM which isn't necessarily aware of everything. Yes, a switch could be added to the ORM where the user instructs it to not ensure that the schema exists, but that's placing unnecessary burden on the user - having the "ensure" operation silently no-op (instead of throwing) if the schema already exists just makes everything smoother.
I get that point, and even have sympathy for it. But I'm also fond of the position that "ensuring a schema exists" is not something the ORM should be doing. But, if you want to do it anyway you can, with a minimal amount of pl/pgsql code.
Is there any specific reason you think this shouldn't be done?
As I said before, your position seems reasonable. I've also got a couple of reasonable complaints about IF EXISTS out there. But there is little interest in changing the status quo with regards to the promises that IF EXISTS makes. And even with my less constrained views I find that doing anything but returning an error to a user that issues CREATE SCHEMA on a database for which they lack CREATE privileges is of limited benefit. Would I support a well-written patch that made this the new rule? Probably. Would I write one or spend time trying to convince others to write one? No.
