Re: generic reloptions improvement

Simon Riggs wrote:

> Custom variable classes are often useful, but they are system wide. It
> would be good to be able to use table-level options and have them work
> very similarly to something we already have. Table-level options are
> just an obvious "normalisation" of how we handle parameters.
>
> If you really can't see a use for this, OK, then: Please can you put in
> a plugin API for user defined reloptions as well as what you are
> proposing. We discussed this before in late July/early Aug on thread
> "Uncopied parameters..."

I've been giving this a thought and I don't see any easy way to handle
it. Since I've been threatened that this whole thing may be punted for
8.5 if I'm not quick about it, I've left this alone for now, and will
concentrate on getting the namespace thing done which will allow
specifying reloptions for the toast table by an ALTER TABLE on the main
table. It's not that I don't see a use for it; it's just that I don't
have the time for it right now.

(Note: I think there are ways to do this; they'll involve storing the
unknown options as a text array. It won't be pretty or performant, but
it seems the only way around the fact that heap_reloptions comes
hardcoded with the system.)

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.