Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options
От | Fabrízio de Royes Mello |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFcNs+p+2OA2fg7o-8KWmckazjAYWue6mVNnUdpuRpT0PZ8D_g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br />On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Robert Haas <<a href="mailto:robertmhaas@gmail.com">robertmhaas@gmail.com</a>>wrote:<br />><br />> Well, I'm not sure that's reallyany big deal, but I'm not wedded to<br /> > the label idea. My principal concern is: I'm opposed to allowing<br/>> unvalidated options into the database. I think it should be a<br />> requirement that if the validatorcan't be found and called, then the<br /> > reloption is no good and you just reject it. So, if we go with the<br/>> reloptions route, I'd want to see pg_register_option_namespace go away<br />> in favor of some solution thatpreserves that property. One thing I<br /> > kind of like about the LABEL approach is that it applies to virtually<br/>> every object type, meaning that we might not have to repeat this<br />> discussion when (as seems inevitable)people want to be able to do<br /> > things to schemas or tablespaces or roles. But I don't hold that<br />>position so strongly as to be unwilling to entertain any other<br />> options.<br />><br /><br />During the lastdays I thought about this discussion and to use SECLABELs sounds weird to me. Here in Brazil we call this kind of thing'gambiarra'. Because we'll try to use something that born with a very well defined purpose to another purpose. PersonallyI don't like that.<br /><br />If we think more about SECLABELs, in a more abstract way, it is just a 'property'about database objects. And the same is COMMENTs. Both SECLABEL and COMMENT provide a way to store something aboutobjects.<br /><br />Maybe we can think about a new object on top of COMMENT and SECLABELs. An object called 'PROPERTY'or 'OPTION'. And COMMENTs and SECLABELs can be just a kind of this new object, and we must introduce a new kindcallled 'CUSTOM'.<br /><br />I thought about this because representation (syntax) of SECLABELs and COMMENTs are similar.They describe something about objects, they have local and shared catalog.<br /><br />This is just something thatoccurred to me. Maybe I'm completely wrong. Or not!<br /><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">Comments?<br /><br /></div><divclass="gmail_extra">--<br />Fabrízio de Royes Mello<br />Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL<br />>> Timbira:<a href="http://www.timbira.com.br">http://www.timbira.com.br</a><br /> >> Blog sobre TI: <a href="http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com">http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com</a><br/>>> Perfil Linkedin: <a href="http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello">http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello</a><br/> >> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/fabriziomello">http://twitter.com/fabriziomello</a></div></div>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: