On 22 November 2017 at 03:35, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:14 PM, David G. Johnston < > > david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What would help the majority of readers is if a rule could be added that > >> keys off of the word "unsubscribe" (and maybe some other key phrases) > and > >> dumps it into a non-public moderation queue where requests can be > handled > >> manually and prevented from reaching the list members. > > > This is already the case, but clearly this rule was a bit too restrictive > > to avoid too many false positives. > > It should also be pointed out that the old system did WAY too much of > that, often causing messages to get dumped into the moderation queue > because they happened to contain words that looked like majordomo > commands. I do not think that an aggressive filter for "unsubscribe" > is a good idea --- note, for example, that none of this thread would > be seeing the light of day in any timely fashion if the new code > did that.
Not to mention that we have publish/subscribe in logical replication now. "How do I unsubscribe my table" -> /dev/null. Ooops. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
