On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> That's project policy >> and always has been. When somebody implements 50% of a feature, or >> worse yet 95% of a feature, it violates the POLA for users and doesn't >> always subsequently get completed, leaving us with long-term warts >> that are hard to eliminate. > > So why was project policy violated when we released 9.3 with only DROP > event support? Surely that was a worse violation of POLA than my > suggestion?
Well, obviously I didn't think so at the time, or I would have objected. I felt, and still feel, that implementing one kind of event trigger (drop) does not necessarily require implementing another kind (create). I think that's clearly different from implementing either one for only some object types. "This event trigger will be called whenever an object is dropped" is a reasonable contract with the user. "This other event trigger will be called whenever an object is created, unless it happens to be a schema" is much less reasonable. At least in my opinion. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
