Re: replicating DROP commands across servers

On 10/03/2014 08:08 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Alvaro,
>
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
>> There are three fixmes in the code.  One can be handled by just removing
>> the line; we don't really care about duplicating 10 lines of boilerplate
>> code.  The other two mean missing support for domain constraints and for
>> default ACLs.  Is there absolutely no feedback to be had on the
>> mechanism used by the patch?
>>
>> Since the patch has had good feedback and no further comments arise, I
>> can just implement support for those two missing object types and push,
>> and everybody will be happy.  Right?
>
> In general, I'd say yes, but I'll take a look at the patch now and
> provide feedback in a couple hours anyway.

Thanks Stephen!

I had a very brief look at the docs, and these extra outputs from 
pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects caught my eye:

> +        <row>
> +         <entry><literal>address_names</literal></entry>
> +         <entry><type>text[]</type></entry>
> +         <entry>
> +          An array that, together with <literal>address_args</literal>,
> +          can be used by the C-language function getObjectAddress() to
> +          recreate the object address in a remote server containing a similar object.
> +         </entry>
> +        </row>
> +        <row>
> +         <entry><literal>address_args</literal></entry>
> +         <entry><type>text[]</type></entry>
> +         <entry>
> +          See <literal>address_names</literal> above.
> +         </entry>
> +        </row>

I couldn't find a function called getObjectAddress anywhere. Typo?

Also, is providing a C-language function the best we can do? The rest of 
the information returned by pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects is usable 
from any language.

- Heikki