| From: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, Vik Reykja <vikreykja(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Schema version management |
| Date: | 2012-07-05 16:05:10 |
| Message-ID: | CAASwCXccBPX4OnmBNZo-FrBjvugrOgiSTmNR9y7oTiNadgFFZQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> FWIW, I'm attracted to the all-similarly-named-functions-together
> method, mainly because it dodges the problem of how to encode a
> function's argument list into a filename. However, we're being
> short-sighted to only think of functions here. What about operators?
> Or casts? Those don't have simple names either.
>
Someone suggested to urlencode them. I think that's a quite good solution.
Personally, I don't have any user-defined operators or casts. Don't know
how common it is in general, but it must of course work for these as well.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-05 16:09:10 | Re: Schema version management |
| Previous Message | Ronan Dunklau | 2012-07-05 16:04:28 | PG9.2 and FDW query planning. |