> On 3 Apr 2023, at 16:09, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 9:15 AM Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: >>> On 3 Apr 2023, at 15:09, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I continue to think it's odd that the sense of this is inverted as >>> compared with row_security. >> >> I'm not sure I follow. Do you propose that the GUC enables classes of event >> triggers, the default being "all" (or similar) and one would remove the type >> of >> EVT for which debugging is needed? That doesn't seem like a bad idea, just >> one >> that hasn't come up in the discussion (and I didn't think about). > > Right. Although to be fair, that idea doesn't sound as good if we're > going to have settings other than "on" or "off". Yeah. The patch as it stands allow for disabling specific types rather than all-or-nothing, which is why the name was "ignore". > I'm not sure what the best thing to do is here, I just think it > deserves some thought. Absolutely, the discussion is much appreciated. Having done some thinking I think I'm still partial to framing it as a disabling GUC rather than an enabling; with the act of setting it being "As an admin I want to skip execution of all evt's of type X". -- Daniel Gustafsson