Re: sql_drop Event Trigger

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
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: 2013-02-14 20:39:29
Message-ID: m2zjz6zl32.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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?
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2013-02-14 21:24:50 Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2013-02-14 20:05:41 Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system