On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Adam Brightwell
<adam.brightwell@crunchydatasolutions.com> wrote:
> Robert,
>
>> To articular my own concerns perhaps a bit better, there are two major
>> things I don't like about the whole DIRALIAS proposal. Number one,
>> you're creating this SQL object whose name is not actually used for
>> anything other than manipulating the alias you created. The users are
>> still operating on pathnames. That's awfully strange.
>
> That's an interesting point and I don't disagree that it seems a little
> strange. However, isn't this approach similar if not the same (other than
> operating on path names) as with some other objects, specifically rules and
> policies?
Hmm. Maybe. Somehow it feels different to me. A rule or policy is
something internal to the system, and you have to identify it somehow.
A directory, though, already has a name, so giving it an additional
dummy name seems strange. But, you do have a point.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company