On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
> At least, it is working. However, it is not a perfect solution to the
> future updates
> of code paths in the core.
Hmm. So, do you want this committed? If so, I think the major thing
it lacks is documentation.
I can't help noticing that this amounts, altogether, to less than 600
lines of code. I am not sure what your hesitation in taking this
approach is. Certainly, there are things not to like in here, but
I've seen a lot worse, and you can always refine it later. For a
first cut, why not? Even if you had the absolutely perfect hooks in
core, how much would it save compared to what's here now? How
different would your ideal implementation be from what you've done
As regards future updates of code paths in core, nothing in here looks
terribly likely to get broken; or at least if it does then I think
quite a lot of other things will get broken, too. Anything we do has
some maintenance burden, and this doesn't look particularly bad to me.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Kohei KaiGai||Date: 2011-12-03 08:18:00|
|Subject: Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem|
|Previous:||From: Andres Freund||Date: 2011-12-03 00:26:22|
|Subject: Re: Command Triggers|