On 30.10.24 13:31, jian he wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 7:54 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I made a patch for this. I have expanded the narrative discussion on
what commands are supported for event triggers, also made a few
corrections/additions there, based on inspecting the source code. And
On 29.10.24 23:33, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 03:53:43PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
+1, I think this is a net improvement.
Agreed. I have spent some time looking in the past few years looking
at patches that tweaked this table, and it was always hard to figure
out if
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 7:54 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> I made a patch for this. I have expanded the narrative discussion on
> what commands are supported for event triggers, also made a few
> corrections/additions there, based on inspecting the source code. And
> then removed the big matrix
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 03:53:43PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> +1, I think this is a net improvement.
Agreed. I have spent some time looking in the past few years looking
at patches that tweaked this table, and it was always hard to figure
out if it was completely right.
> The only thing I
> On 29 Oct 2024, at 12:54, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> I made a patch for this. I have expanded the narrative discussion on what
> commands are supported for event triggers, also made a few
> corrections/additions there, based on inspecting the source code. And then
> removed the big matrix
I made a patch for this. I have expanded the narrative discussion on
what commands are supported for event triggers, also made a few
corrections/additions there, based on inspecting the source code. And
then removed the big matrix, which doesn't provide any additional
information, I think.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 5:47 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> On 19.03.24 10:34, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> >>> "Only for local objects"
> >>> is there any reference explaining "local objects"?
> >>> I think local object means objects that only affect one single database?
> > That's a bigger problem
> On 21 Mar 2024, at 22:47, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> On 19.03.24 10:34, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
"Only for local objects"
is there any reference explaining "local objects"?
I think local object means objects that only affect one single database?
>> That's a bigger problem than t
On 19.03.24 10:34, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
"Only for local objects"
is there any reference explaining "local objects"?
I think local object means objects that only affect one single database?
That's a bigger problem than the table representation, we never define what
"local object" mean anywher
> On 19 Mar 2024, at 02:14, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 08:00:00AM +0800, jian he wrote:
>> I think the "X" and "-" mean in this matrix [0] is not very intuitive.
>> mainly because "X" tends to mean negative things in most cases.
>> we can write a sentence saying "X" means
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 08:00:00AM +0800, jian he wrote:
> I think the "X" and "-" mean in this matrix [0] is not very intuitive.
> mainly because "X" tends to mean negative things in most cases.
> we can write a sentence saying "X" means this, "-" means that.
>
> or maybe Check mark [1] and Cros
11 matches
Mail list logo
