Re: Add CREATE support to event triggers
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add CREATE support to event triggers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqTOjLgvZ-aS3Os5WtX4d2Q5X68q5rpgiJBZidQbA9v5qw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add CREATE support to event triggers (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 05:56:00PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2014-11-08 11:52:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> > Adding a similar >> > level of burden to support a feature with a narrow use-case seems like >> > a nonstarter from here. >> >> I don't understand this statement. In my experience the lack of a usable >> replication solution that allows temporary tables and major version >> differences is one of the most, if not *the* most, frequent criticisms >> of postgres I hear. How is this a narrow use case? > > How would replicating DDL handle cases where the master and slave > servers have different major versions and the DDL is only supported by > the Postgres version on the master server? If it would fail, does this > limit the idea that logical replication allows major version-different > replication? Marking this patch as "Returned with feedback". Even with the more-fundamental arguments of putting such replication solution in-core or not (I am skeptical as well btw), on a code-base-discussion-only I don't think that this patch is acceptable as-is without more structure of jsonb to do on-memory manipulation of containers (aka remove ObjTree stuff). Regards, -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: