Re: sql_drop Event Trigger

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: sql_drop Event Trigger
Date: 2013-02-16 01:20:10
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYH--zrt9STdTWbwpZyYM6cKch2ZS0nGSbg9Dw-1XDVVA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
<dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Wait, I'm confused. I had a note to myself to come back and review
>> this, but now that I look at it, I didn't think that patch was pending
>> review. Alvaro, Tom, and I all made comments that seems to impinge
>> upon that design rather heavily. No?
>
> The current design follows exactly your comments and design requests.
> Tom and Álvaro comments are the ones you did answer to saying that it's
> not 9.3 material, but next release at best, subject to heavy refactoring.
>
> What did I miss?

Well, there's this, upon which we surely have not achieved consensus:

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmobQ6NGsxGuiHWqcygF0Q+7Y9zHNERePo3S1vsWKKNw2TQ@mail.gmail.com

And then Tom also wrote this, which is kind of a good point, too:

> Well, a list of object OIDs is of exactly zero use once the command
> has been carried out. So I don't think that that represents a useful
> or even very testable feature on its own, if there's no provision to
> fire user code while the OIDs are still in the catalogs.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-02-16 01:24:16 Re: Materialized views WIP patch
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2013-02-16 01:01:10 Re: Materialized views WIP patch