Horton

Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp>
Date: 2013-05-13T17:04:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> It disallowed it only for tables, and not for any other object type.
>> I found that completely arbitrary.  It's perfectly obvious that people
>> want to be able to create objects in pg_catalog; shall we adopt a rule
>> that you can put extension there, as long as those extensions don't
>> happen to contain tables?  That is certainly confusing and arbitrary.
>
> Why don't we just prohibit deletion/modification for anything below
> FirstNormalObjectId instead of using the schema as a restriction? Then
> we can allow creation for tables as well.

We currently do, but that led to problems with $SUBJECT.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Extend and improve use of EXTRA_REGRESS_OPTS.

  2. Remove misplaced sanity check from heap_create().

  3. Silently ignore any nonexistent schemas that are listed in search_path.