2013/12/31 Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziome...@gmail.com> > > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > 2013/12/31 Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziome...@gmail.com> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hello > >> > > >> > I am looking on this patch > >> > > >> > ALTER TABLE foo SET (ext.somext.do_replicate=true); > >> > > >> > Why is there fixed prefix "ext" ? > >> > > >> > This feature is similar to attaching setting to function > >> > > >> > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION ... SET var = ...; > >> > > >> > We can use someprefix.someguc without problems there. > >> > > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> We use the prefix "ext" (aka namespace) to distinguish these options > which are related to "extensions". > >> > >> Have you seen the previous thread [1] ? > > > > > > yes, but I don't understand why it is necessary? I use a analogy with > custom GUC - and there we don't use similar prefix. Only any prefix is > required - and it can contain a dot. > > > > We use the namespace "ext" to the internal code > (src/backend/access/common/reloptions.c) skip some validations and store > the custom GUC. > > Do you think we don't need to use the "ext" namespace? >
yes - there be same mechanism as we use for GUC Pavel > > > Regards, > > > -- > Fabrízio de Royes Mello > Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL > >> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br > >> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com > >> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello > >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello >