> On 10/23/2020 9:31 AM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> [...]
> * useless with encrypted traffic
>
> So, +1 for such hooks.
>
> Regards,
Ultimately Postgresql is supposed to be extensible.
I don't see an API hook as being some crazy idea even if some may not like what
I might want to use
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 17:08:44 +1200
David Rowley wrote:
[...]
> I wondered if there was much in the way of use-cases like a traffic
> filter, or statement replication. I wasn't sure if it was a solution
> looking for a problem or not, but it seems like it could be productive
> to talk about possibi
> On 09/23/2020 9:26 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> ...
> > The hook I'd like to see would be in the PostgresMain() loop
> > for the API "firstchar" messages.
>
> What, to invent your own protocol? Where will you find client libraries
> buying into that?
No API/client changes are needed for:
1) API
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 at 16:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Daniel Wood writes:
> > Hooks exist all over PG for extensions to cover various specific usages.
> > The hook I'd like to see would be in the PostgresMain() loop
> > for the API "firstchar" messages.
>
> What, to invent your own protocol? Where w
Daniel Wood writes:
> Hooks exist all over PG for extensions to cover various specific usages.
> The hook I'd like to see would be in the PostgresMain() loop
> for the API "firstchar" messages.
What, to invent your own protocol? Where will you find client libraries
buying into that?
I'm not rea
