On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:53:15AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Kohei KaiGai <kai...@kaigai.gr.jp> writes: > > Here is no other reason than what Alvaro mentioned in the upthread. > > We intended to store security label of SELinux (less than 100bytes at most), > > so I didn't think it leads any problem actually. > > > On the other hands, pg_seclabel was merged in another development cycle. > > We didn't have deep discussion about necessity of toast table of > > pg_seclabel. > > I added its toast table mechanically. > > So maybe we should get rid of the toast table for pg_seclabel. One less > catalog table for a feature that hardly anyone is using seems like a fine > idea to me ...
Is this still an open item? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
