Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 11:33:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> and I don't even see the argument for doing it via a table rather
>>> than via the postmaster log.
>
>> Simple. Postmaster logs can roll over or otherwise be lost without
>> damaging the DB. This would provide a non-volatile log of DDLs.
>
> In that case you have to provide a pretty strong argument why everyone
> should be forced to have a non-volatile log of DDLs. Or will there be
> a way to turn it off? What about applications that, say, create and
> delete tens of thousands of temp tables every day?
What about system-event-driven triggers as a mechanism for this? That
should make it simple for people to extend how they wish - e.g. - setup default preferences when new users are added -
setuptemp.y tables at session start - monitor ddl (as David wanted)
Now that we have sub-transactions, we could wrap the call to the trigger
function so that errors didn't abort the user setup/login etc.
There's been demand for this sort of thing fairly regularly - I'd
probably use it myself.
-- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd