On 10/4/10 10:24 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I understand that we need to disconnect users if the database is
> dropped (it's kind of hard to access a database that's not there any
> more...) but I'm fuzzy on why we'd need to do that if it is merely
> renamed.
This seems like an unexpected benefit, and the behavior which users
would desire if they could choose it. Why would we break what's not broken?
+1 to keep ALTER DATABASE functionality the way it is, and merely fix
the docs.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
