Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal

On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:

> On 7/13/16 2:06 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> On 07/07/2016 01:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> There was an unconference session on this topic at PGCon and quite a
>>> number of people there stated that they found DDL to be an ease-of-use
>>> feature and wanted to have it.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, I haven't meet anyone yet that would like to have:
>>
>> select replicate_these_relations('['public']);
>>
>> vs:
>>
>> ALTER SCHEMA public ENABLE REPLICATION;
>>
>> (or something like that).
>>
>
> I generally agree, but I think the more important question is "Why?". Is
> it becouse DDL looks more like a sentence? Is it because arrays are a PITA?
> Is it too hard to call functions?

Once you get fine grained enough to support replicating different sets
of possibly overlapping objects/namespaces to different groups of
recipients, the DDL approach becomes just as convoluted as calling
functions and nobody will memorize the entire syntax.

Jan

>
> --
> Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
> Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
> Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
> 855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>

--
Jan Wieck
Senior Postgres Architect
http://pgblog.wi3ck.info