On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 11:20:13AM -0500, David Steele wrote: > On 2/19/16 10:54 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > >> Understood. My point is that there is a short list of read events, and > >> many DDL events. We have already hesitated to record DDL changes for > >> logical replication because of the code size, maintenance overhead, and > >> testing required. > > > > DDL is already captured using the event triggers mechanism (which is > > what it was invented for in the first place). The only thing we don't > > have is a hardcoded mechanism to transform it from C struct format to > > SQL language. > > Since DDL event triggers only cover database-level DDL they miss a lot > that is very important to auditing, e.g. CREATE/ALTER/DROP ROLE, > GRANT/REVOKE, CREATE/ALTER/DROP DATABASE, etc.
Well, we need to enhance them then. > I would like to see a general mechanism that allows event triggers, > logical replication, and audit to all get the information they need > without them being tied to each other directly. I think the reporting of DDL would be produced in a way that could be used by auditing or logical replication, as I already stated. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
