On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 09:19:05PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> If we expect this function to mainly be applied to pg_class.reltablespace, > >> then it seems like it ought to understand that zero means "the database > >> default" and substitute the database's default tablespace. That might > >> or might not be the same as the cluster default. > >> > >> Alternatively, we could expect pg_upgrade to understand that and make > >> the substitution itself, but if the same would be needed by most uses of > >> the function, maybe we should just do it here. > > > +1 for doing it in the function. I think that will improve > > ease-of-use and give up nothing. > > I'm inclined to agree. It won't help pg_upgrade, but that's because > the query pg_upgrade is using is constrained by backwards-compatibility > considerations: it's *necessary* to join to pg_tablespace if you want > any location details pre-9.2. But as of 9.2 it's plausible to consider > applying this function directly to pg_class.reltablespace, so we should > make it behave sanely for that use-case. > > I think it's probably about a two-line change, will research and > apply if so.
Agreed, thanks. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
