Re: Operators and schemas - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Operators and schemas
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.30.0204151710080.834-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Operators and schemas  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Operators and schemas  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane writes:

> But: do you really want to see all dumped rules, defaults, etc in that
> style?  Ugh... talk about loss of readability...

I imagine that pg_dump could be able to figure out that certain references
would be "local", so no explicit schema qualification is necessary.
Thus, the only weird-looking operator invocations would be those that were
also created in weird ways.  In general, pg_dump should try to avoid
making unnecessary schema qualifications on any object so that you can
edit the dump and only change the schema name in one place.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: RFC: Generating useful names for foreign keys and checks
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Operators and schemas