Re: Schema version management

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Joel Jacobson
Тема Re: Schema version management
Дата
Msg-id CAASwCXd9ct_k6NA-SC-7qo6+NA=H7aA8nwUJX9jPKTfoQqrhbw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Schema version management  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Schema version management  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
FWIW, I think you could save a level of naming if you were willing to
put the type first, since the type would imply whether the object
lives in a schema or not:

        [type]/[name].sql
        [type]/[schema]/[name].sql


Could work. But I think it's more relevant and useful to keep all objects
in a schema in its own directory.

That way it's easier to get an overview of what's in a schema,
simply by looking at the file structure of the schema directory.

I think its more common you want to "show all objects within schema X"
than "show all schemas of type X".

PS.

I was thinking -- the guys back in the 70s must have spent a lot of time
thinking about the UNIX directory structure -- before they decided upon it.

I did some googling and found found this explanation which was quite
amusing to say the least :-)


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Schema version management
Следующее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Schema version management