On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 12:24 PM, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
>> Also, somebody who wants a check like that isn't necessarily going
>> to want "no WHERE clause" training wheels. So you're going to need
>> to think about facilities to enable or disable different checks.
>
> This is just the discussion I'd hoped for. I'll draft up a patch in
> the next day or two, reflecting what's gone so far.
It looks like this was never produced, and it's been over a month. A
patch that hasn't been updated in over a month and doesn't have
complete consensus doesn't seem like something we should still be
thinking about committing in the second half of March, so I'm going to
mark this Returned with Feedback.
On the substance of the issue, I think there's no problem with having
a module like this, and I think it's fine if it only handles the
WHERE-less case in the first version. Somebody can add more later if
they want. But naming the module in a generic way so that it lends
itself to such additions seems like a pretty good plan.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company