RE: Big 7.1 open items - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hiroshi Inoue
Subject RE: Big 7.1 open items
Date
Msg-id EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJGEHCCCAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Big 7.1 open items  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Big 7.1 open items  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> 
> However I do see a bit of a problem here: since DROP DATABASE is
> ordinarily executed by a backend that's running in a different database,
> how's it going to read pg_class of the target database?  Perhaps it will
> be necessary to fire up a sub-backend that runs in the target DB for
> long enough to kill all the user tables.  Looking messy...
>

Why do we have to have system tables per *database* ?
Is there anything wrong with global system tables ?
And how about adding dbid to pg_class,pg_proc etc ?

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Ross J. Reedstrom"
Date:
Subject: Re: AW: Big 7.1 open items
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Misc. consequences of backend memory management changes