On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >>> It also seems to me that we're getting seriously sidetracked from the >>> dependency-tracking part of this project which seems to me to be a >>> much deeper and more fundamental issue. >> I thought that part was a pretty simple problem, actually. Have an >> object representing the module, make sure each component object in the >> module has an AUTO dependency link to that object. Where's the >> difficulty?
I think it's a simple problem too... except for the not-so-small detail of who is going to implement it. > Well, yes. Honestly, I think all this search_path stuff is a red herring. We > are once again in danger of over-designing this instead of doing the simple > thing first (namely, don't worry about the search_path). Right. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
