Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal

On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 02:55:20PM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
> > On 7/13/16 2:06 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >> On 07/07/2016 01:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> There was an unconference session on this topic at PGCon and quite a
> >>> number of people there stated that they found DDL to be an ease-of-use
> >>> feature and wanted to have it.
> >>
> >> Yeah, I haven't meet anyone yet that would like to have:
> >>
> >> select replicate_these_relations('['public']);
> >>
> >> vs:
> >>
> >> ALTER SCHEMA public ENABLE REPLICATION;
> >>
> >> (or something like that).
> >>
> >
> > I generally agree, but I think the more important question is "Why?". Is
> > it becouse DDL looks more like a sentence? Is it because arrays are a PITA?
> > Is it too hard to call functions?
> 
> Once you get fine grained enough to support replicating different
> sets of possibly overlapping objects/namespaces to different groups
> of recipients, the DDL approach becomes just as convoluted as
> calling functions and nobody will memorize the entire syntax.

I don't see this as an actual problem.  I've written parts of the
SELECT syntax, but I haven't memorized even all of that.

DDL doesn't promise to be more complicated or easier to get wrong than
function calls, as far as I can tell.  The opposite could well be
true.

Best,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate