Re: 1.8.4 bug DB Restriction field

Dave Page a écrit :
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Zach Conrad a écrit :
>>> Thank you for your quick response.
>>>
>>> There are a few things this brings up:
>>>
>>> 1. The pgAdmin help file states the use of datname IN ('blah') in the
DB
>>> Restriction field
>>> 2. Most people know which databases they want to connect to. Wouldn't
it
>>> make
>>>   more sense to use datename IN (...) rather than NOT IN?
>>>
>> OK, it seems my bugfix was wrong. And I suppose the one on schema
>> restriction is also wrong.
>>
>> My patch is more user friendly (you don't have to know the name of
>> pg_database's columns), but it allows less stuff (you can just give
>> databases' names, you won't be able to filter on columns other than
>> datname). It seems a regression to me, sorry about this.
>>
>> Dave, what do you think I should do ? remove the patch ?
> 
> Just remove the NOT?
> 

I can do this. But, for example, if someone was using this filter field 
to get out template databases, removing the NOT won't fix this.


-- 
Guillaume.
  http://www.postgresqlfr.org
  http://dalibo.com

-- 
Sent via pgadmin-sup****t mailing list (pgadmin-sup****t@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-sup****t