>-----Original Message----- >From: Michael Paquier [mailto:mich...@paquier.xyz] >Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 10:22 AM
>This kind of thing is heavily application-dependent. For example, you would >likely not care if an operator, who has newly-joined the team in >charge of >the maintenance of this data, drops unfortunately a table which includes logs >from 10 years back, and you would very likely care >about a table dropped >which has user's login data. My point is that you need to carefully design >the shape of the configuration you would use, >so as any application's admin >would be able to cope with it, for example allowing exclusion filters with >regular expressions could be a good >idea to dig into. And also you need to >think about it so as it is backward compatible. Thanks for comments. Does that mean that the application (user) is interested in which table? For example, there are two tables A. It is ok even if one table disappears, but it is troubled if another table B disappears. So, when the table B is dropped, automatic restore point works. In the table A, automatic restore point does not work. So, it is difficult to implement that automatic restore point in postgresql by default. Is my interpretation right? --- Naoki Yotsunaga
