Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
There were quite some proposals about additional triggers (on
connect/disconnnect) around, I wonder if some kind of
schema/database-level trigger could be used for DDL logging.
Very vague idea, please rant now :-)
Regards,
Andreas
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
