On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 09:47:44AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > +1 for adding some hooks to support this kind of thing, but I think > the names you've chosen are not very good. The hook name should > describe the place from which it is called, not the purpose for which > one imagines that it will be used, because somebody else might imagine > another use. Both BufferExtendCheckPerms_hook_type and > SmgrStat_hook_type are imagining that they know what the hook does - > CheckPerms in the first case and Stat in the second case.
I personally don't mind making Postgres more pluggable, but I don't think that we actually need the extra ones proposed here at the layer of smgr, as smgr is already a layer designed to call an underlying set of APIs able to extend, unlink, etc. depending on the storage type. > For this particular purpose, I don't immediately see why you need a > hook in both places. If ReadBuffer is called with P_NEW, aren't we > guaranteed to end up in smgrextend()? Yes, that's a bit awkward. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature