From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: allow_system_table_mods stuff |
Date: | 2019-06-24 15:24:41 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY-KNjYGNWm423ku2dsthhWq9TXK9z38Y-ejG3-gZokYQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 11:21 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > I'm repeating myself, but I still think it's super-useful to
> > distinguish things which are "for expert use only" from things which
> > are "totally bonkers."
>
> Agreed, although "DML vs DDL" is a pretty poor approximation of that
> boundary. As shown in examples upthread, you can find reasonable things
> to do and totally-catastrophic things to do in both categories.
I agree. I would like it if there were a way to do better, but I'm
not sure that there is, at least for a reasonable level of effort.
> There's an aesthetic argument to be had about whether to have two
> bools or one three-way switch, but I prefer the former; there's
> no backward-compatibility issue here since allow_system_table_mods
> couldn't be set by applications anyway.
I'm happy to defer on that point.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-06-24 15:26:49 | Re: Usage of epoch in txid_current |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-06-24 15:20:51 | Re: allow_system_table_mods stuff |