Le jeudi 12 novembre 2009 à 10:12:00, Dave Page a écrit : > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Guillaume Lelarge > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le dimanche 1 novembre 2009 à 13:24:10, Dave Page a écrit : > >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 11:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > >> > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Le vendredi 30 octobre 2009 à 23:48:45, Tom Lane a écrit : > >> >> Thom Brown <[email protected]> writes: > >> >> > How is pgAdmin determining the serial type in this case? > >> >> > >> >> Most likely it's looking for the pg_depend entry that shows the > >> >> sequence as being "owned by" the column. However, that's an > >> >> oversimplification of reality. I would imagine that pgAdmin will lie > >> >> to you in exactly the same cases that used to break pg_dump (notably, > >> >> where someone has manually adjusted either the default expression or > >> >> the sequence...) > >> > > >> > I've just read this. I wasn't aware of this. Should we suppress this > >> > behavior of pgAdmin? > >> > >> Do you have a proposed fix? I suspect people won't want us to stop > >> showing columns as 'SERIAL' when they actually were created that way. > > > > Other ideas than doing what pg_dump does? I'm afraid not. > > pg_dump isn't designed to make the output look pretty, which is the > major issue here. We're trying to do both. >
Yes. > It seems to me that correctness trumps aesthetics, so we probably will > have to do what pg_dump does. That's the main reason I started this thread :) > Care to work up a patch? > Yep. On my TODO list right now. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
