From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Command Triggers |
Date: | 2011-12-13 15:53:24 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0w-VXSJ5YObNNaFC-1An5weq7RDFzNMoNnDk4-gTJzceg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Now, all that having been said, I also agree that the perfect can be
> the enemy of the good, and we go there frequently. The question I'm
> asking is not whether the feature is perfect, but whether it's
> adequate for even the most basic things people might want to do with
> it. Dimitri says that he wants it so that we can add support for
> CREATE TABLE, ALTER TABLE, and DROP TABLE to Slony, Bucardo, and
> Londiste. My fear is that it won't turn out to be adequate to that
> task, because there won't actually be enough information in the CREATE
> TABLE statement to do the same thing on all servers. In particular,
> you won't have the index or constraint names, and you might not have
> the schema or tablespace information either.
But, you could query all that out from the system catalogs right?
Maybe a better facility should exist to convert a table name to a
create table statement than hand rolling it or invoking pg_dump, but
that's a separate issue.
This feature fills an important niche given that you can't hook RI
triggers to system catalogs...it comes up (in short, +1).
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-13 15:57:11 | Re: Command Triggers |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-13 15:51:54 | Re: libpq: PQcmdStatus, PQcmdTuples signatures can be painlessly improved |