On 17.01.2021 16:53, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:28 AM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> On 2020-12-31 04:28, David Fetter wrote:
>>> This could probably use a lot of filling in, but having it in the
>>> actual documentation beats needing to know folklore even to know
>>> that the capability is there.
>> This patch seems quite short of a state where one could begin to
>> evaluate it. Documenting the hooks better seems a worthwhile goal. I
>> think the question is whether we can develop documentation that is
>> genuinely useful by itself without studying the relevant source code.
>> This submission does not address that question.
> Even just having a list of available hooks would be a nice improvement though :)
>
> But maybe it's something that belongs better in a README file instead,
> since as you say it's unlikely to be properly useful without looking
> at the source anyway. But just a list of hooks and a *very* high
> overview of where each of them hooks in would definitely be useful to
> have somewhere, I think. Having to find with "grep" whether there may
> or may not exist a hook for approximately what it is you're looking
> for is definitely a process to improve on.
>
+1 for README.
Hooks are intended for developers and can be quite dangerous without
proper understanding of the internal code.
I also want to remind about a readme gathered by mentees [1]. It was
done under a PostgreSQL license, so we can use it.
By the way, is there any agreement on the plain-text format of
PostrgeSQL README files or we can use md?
[1] https://github.com/AmatanHead/psql-hooks/blob/master/Detailed.md
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company