Thanks for the review.
On 16 October 2014 23:23, MauMau <maumau307@gmail.com> wrote:
> (3)
> SELECT against a view generated two audit log lines, one for the view
> itself, and the other for the underlying table. Is this intended? I'm not
> saying that's wrong but just asking.
Intended
> (4)
> I'm afraid audit-logging DML statements on temporary tables will annoy
> users, because temporary tables are not interesting.
Agreed
> (5)
> This is related to (4). As somebody mentioned, I think the ability to
> select target objects of audit logging is definitely necessary. Without
> that, huge amount of audit logs would be generated for uninteresting
> objects. That would also impact performance.
Discussed and agreed already
> (6)
> What's the performance impact of audit logging? I bet many users will ask
> "about what percentage would the throughtput decrease by?" I'd like to know
> the concrete example, say, pgbench and DBT-2.
Don't know, but its not hugely relevant. If you need it, you need it.
> (8)
> The code looks good. However, I'm worried about the maintenance. How can
> developers notice that pgaudit.c needs modification when they add a new SQL
> statement? What keyword can they use to grep the source code to find
> pgaudit.c?
Suggestions welcome.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services