From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Command Triggers patch v18 |
Date: | 2012-03-29 13:01:45 |
Message-ID: | CAA-aLv5zzsW=Qk3LAFO1RS6nbzY=yJE+ptS2GGBJRCOfCyBe_w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 29 March 2012 13:30, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> I'll go make that happen, and still need input here. We first want to
> have command triggers on specific commands or ANY command, and we want
> to implement 3 places from where to fire them.
>
> Here's a new syntax proposal to cope with that:
>
> create command trigger before COMMAND_STEP of alter table
> execute procedure snitch();
>
> - before the process utility switch, with only command tag and parse
> tree
>
> create command trigger foo before start of alter table
> execute procedure snitch();
>
> - before running the command, after having done basic error checks,
> security checks, name lookups and locking, with all information
>
> create command trigger before execute of alter table
> execute procedure snitch();
>
> - after having run the command
>
> create command trigger foo before end of alter table
> execute procedure snitch();
Is it necessary to add this complexity in this version? Can't we keep
it simple but in a way that allows the addition of this later? The
testing of all these new combinations sounds like a lot of work.
--
Thom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-03-29 13:46:23 | Re: Standbys, txid_current_snapshot, wraparound |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-03-29 12:49:08 | Re: Finer Extension dependencies |