Re: template0 database comment

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: template0 database comment
Date: 2011-03-12 14:14:32
Message-ID: 201103121414.p2CEEWu00859@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thom Brown wrote:
> On 12 March 2011 13:59, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Dave Page wrote:
> >> On 3/12/11, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> >> >> People are confused about what template0 is for, so I created the
> >> >> attached one-line patch to add a database comment to template0. No
> >> >> initdb, I assume, becuase it is just a comment.
> >> >
> >> >> + ? ? ? ? ?"COMMENT ON DATABASE template0 IS 'only used by pg_dump';\n",
> >> >
> >> > No objection to the concept, but the actual text of this comment is
> >> > approximately 100% wrong.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I'd like to lodge a formal objection to the use of the word
> >> 'approximately' in the above comment.
> >
> > OK, funny guys. ?;-) ?Can someone give me the right text. ?Obviously I
> > don' know what template0 is used for either. ?Is it pg_dumpall perhaps?
>
> 'original template database' ?

I like that. Perhaps "unmodified template database'?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Browne 2011-03-12 14:21:25 Re: template0 database comment
Previous Message Thom Brown 2011-03-12 14:11:28 Re: template0 database comment