Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e'
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e' |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 58C7A345-193B-4813-A7AA-4B78358313D6@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e' (Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite
'e'
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 16, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote: > Right, here's another try. > > The extension does trigger-based DML auditing. You install it using > CREATE EXTENSION and then call one of its functions to enable auditing > for a particular table. That function will create a customised trigger > function based on the table's columns and a trigger that uses it: > > CREATE FUNCTION fn_audit_$table_name() RETURNS TRIGGER … > CREATE TRIGGER … ON $table_name … EXECUTE fn_audit_$table_name; > > All that works fine (with pg_dump too). But if you drop the extension, > the triggers stop working because the trigger function calls functions > in the extension that are now gone. This seems like one manifestation of the more general problem that we don't have any real idea what objects a function definitiondepends on. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: