On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2013/12/31 Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hello >> > >> > I am looking on this patch >> > >> > ALTER TABLE foo SET (ext.somext.do_replicate=true); >> > >> > Why is there fixed prefix "ext" ? >> > >> > This feature is similar to attaching setting to function >> > >> > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION ... SET var = ...; >> > >> > We can use someprefix.someguc without problems there. >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> We use the prefix "ext" (aka namespace) to distinguish these options which are related to "extensions". >> >> Have you seen the previous thread [1] ? > > > yes, but I don't understand why it is necessary? I use a analogy with custom GUC - and there we don't use similar prefix. Only any prefix is required - and it can contain a dot. >
We use the namespace "ext" to the internal code (src/backend/access/common/reloptions.c) skip some validations and store the custom GUC.
Do you think we don't need to use the "ext" namespace?
