| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mary Xu <yxu2162(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: oat_post_create expected behavior |
| Date: | 2022-07-01 18:12:52 |
| Message-ID: | 199291fc276c0540a02d20167fe618b5cb6d710b.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 17:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Right, same thing I'm saying. I also think we should discourage
> people from doing cowboy CCIs inside their OAT hooks, because that
> makes the testability problem even worse. Maybe that means we
> need to uniformly move the CREATE hooks to after a system-provided
> CCI, but I've not thought hard about the implications of that.
Uniformly moving the post-create hooks after CCI might not be as
convenient as I thought at first. Many extensions using post-create
hooks will also want to use post-alter hooks, and it would be difficult
to reuse extension code between those two hooks. It's probably better
to just always specify the snapshot unless you're sure you won't need a
post-alter hook.
It would be nice if it was easier to enforce that these hooks do the
right thing, though.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-07-01 18:59:53 | Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-07-01 18:08:00 | Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes |