"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes: > Personally I prefer the first or last, as default implies to me that > it's a kindof general use database - which, as Tom points out it could > be, however I think it's better to encourage users to only use it as > directed by tool providers, and not for general purpose.
If that is what you want then the database should surely not become the default connection target for clients. The proposal I thought was being made was that we separate the default-connection-target property from the default-CREATE-DATABASE-source property. This business about where tool authors can dump random junk of their own devising does not seem to me to fit at all with either of those properties. I think what you are really asking for is yet another "standard" database named something like TOOLS_ONLY_KEEP_OUT. But I do not see the argument for having that created by default, because any tool that is capable of creating random junk is surely capable of creating a database to put it in. Furthermore, if it's created by default and completely unused in the default installation, lots of DBAs will immediately drop it --- so I entirely fail to see the argument that tools could expect it to be there without any expenditure of their own effort. I still say the most that's needed here is some agreement among tool authors about a common choice of database name to create if their tool is installed. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match