This makes the most sense. One could assume a user who doesn't have access to a particular database shouldn't know what it's for either. So making the comments global could be problematic in some cases.
I'll enforce this and send in a patch. -- Rod ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Tom Lane'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Rod Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Hackers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 2:49 PM Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Really annoying comments... > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 21 April 2002 19:45 > > To: Dave Page > > Cc: Rod Taylor; Hackers List > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Really annoying comments... > > > > > > Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> I'm more inclined to rip it out ;-). > > > > > Eeep! pgAdmin handles comments coming from multiple pg_description > > > tables and it works very well (IMHO) in the pgAdmin UI. By > > all means > > > make them work more sensibly in whatever way seems most > > appropriate - > > > I'll fix pgAdmin to handle it, but don't just rip them out please!! > > > > Well, it would seem like the only sensible rule would be to > > allow COMMENT ON DATABASE only for the *current* database. > > Then at least you know which DB to look in. > > That wouldn't cause me any pain - in pgAdmin the comment is just a property > of a pgDatabase object - if you modify it, it will always be set through a > connection to that database. > > Regards, Dave. > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
