On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 08:33:59AM -0800, Darcy Buskermolen wrote: > On Wednesday 07 December 2005 20:24, Tom Lane wrote: > > Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Anyone remember this patch? > > > http://gorda.di.uminho.pt/community/pgsqlhooks/ > > > The discussion seems to be pretty minimal: > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-06/msg00859.php > > > Does anyone see a need to investigate it further? > > > > I had hoped to see some comments from the Slony people about it. > > I'd feel better about the validity of a set of hooks if more than > > one project agreed that it was useful/appropriate ... > > I missed seeing it all together the first time through, I'll see what I can > do > about taking a indepth look at it over the next few days and provide some > feedback.
While this code might be useful, whouldn't it be much more valuable to provide hooks into xlog so that we could do non-trigger-based replication? (As well as non-trigger-based materialized views...) -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
