<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br />On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Andres Freund <<a
href="mailto:andres@2ndquadrant.com">andres@2ndquadrant.com</a>>wrote:<br />><br />> On 2013-12-31 13:37:59
+0100,Pavel Stehule wrote:<br /> > > > We use the namespace "ext" to the internal code<br />> > >
(src/backend/access/common/reloptions.c)skip some validations and store<br />> > > the custom GUC.<br />>
>><br />> > > Do you think we don't need to use the "ext" namespace?<br /> > > ><br />>
><br/>> > yes - there be same mechanism as we use for GUC<br />><br />> There is no existing mechanism
tohandle conflicts for GUCs. The<br />> difference is that for GUCs nearly no "namespaced" GUCs exist (plperl,<br />
>plpgsql have some), but postgres defines at least autovacuum. and<br />> toast. namespaces for relation
options.<br/>><br /><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">autovacuum. namespace ???<br /></div><div
class="gmail_extra"><br/></div><div class="gmail_extra">The HEAP_RELOPT_NAMESPACES (src/include/access/reloptions.h)
constantdefine only "toast" and "null" as a valid relation option namespace. <br /><br />I missed something?<br
/></div><divclass="gmail_extra"><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">Regards,<br /><br /></div><div
class="gmail_extra">--<br/>Fabrízio de Royes Mello<br />Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL<br />>> Timbira: <a
href="http://www.timbira.com.br">http://www.timbira.com.br</a><br/> >> Blog sobre TI: <a
href="http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com">http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com</a><br/>>> Perfil Linkedin: <a
href="http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello">http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello</a><br/> >> Twitter: <a
href="http://twitter.com/fabriziomello">http://twitter.com/fabriziomello</a></div></div>