OK, the vote is not shifting from '.' to '@'. Is that how we want to go? I like the pg_user enhancement. Marc, comments? This was your baby.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hannu Krosing wrote: > On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 06:00, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Sean Chittenden wrote: > > > > Well, they aren't separate fields so you can't ORDER BY domain. The dot > > > > was used so it looks like a schema based on dbname. > > IMHO it should look like an user in domain ;) > > > > Sorry, I know it's a single field and that there is no split() > > > function (that I'm aware of), but that seems like such a small and > > > easy to fix problem that I personally place a higher value on the more > > > standard nomeclature and use of an @ sign. I understand the value of > > > . for schemas and whatnot, but isn't a user going to be in their own > > > schema to begin with? As for the order by, I've got a list of users > > > per "account" (sales account), so doing the order by is on two columns > > > and the pg_shadow table is generated periodically from our inhouse > > > tables. -sc > > > > I have no personal preference between period and @ or whatever. See if > > you can get some other votes for @ because most left @ when the ORDER BY > > idea came up from Marc. > > I still like @ . And I posted code that could be put in the pg_user view > to split out domain you could ORDER BY. > > > As for it being a special character, it really isn't because the code > > prepends the database name and a period. It doesn't look to see if > > there is a period in the already or anything. > ----------- > Hannu > > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
