Re: [HACKERS] InvokeObjectPostAlterHook() vs. CommandCounterIncrement()

2015-03-09 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Haas wrote: On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Ants Aasma ants.aa...@eesti.ee wrote: On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after

Re: [HACKERS] InvokeObjectPostAlterHook() vs. CommandCounterIncrement()

2013-07-22 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Ants Aasma ants.aa...@eesti.ee wrote: On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after object states. I haven't

Re: [HACKERS] InvokeObjectPostAlterHook() vs. CommandCounterIncrement()

2013-07-21 Thread Ants Aasma
On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after object states. I haven't checked the code to see how it would fit the API, but what about taking a

Re: [HACKERS] InvokeObjectPostAlterHook() vs. CommandCounterIncrement()

2013-07-21 Thread Noah Misch
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:44:51AM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote: On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after object states. I haven't checked