Re: A Question about InvokeObjectPostAlterHook - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: A Question about InvokeObjectPostAlterHook
Date
Msg-id ZEOeXUMtJ5xv5oZM@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A Question about InvokeObjectPostAlterHook  (" Legs Mansion" <1027644833@qq.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 04:16:10PM +0800,  Legs Mansion wrote:
> actually, some location can be tricky to add.
> it looks like CREATE, but it’s actually ALTER, should call
> InvokeObjectPostAlterHook instead
> of InvokeObjectPostCreateHook? eg.,CREATE OR REPLACE, CREATE
> TYPE(perfecting shell type)

Sure, it could be possible to plaster more of these depending on the
control one may want with OATs.  Coming back to the main you point of
the thread you were making, what are the use cases with ALTER TABLE
you were interested in for sepgsql on top of what the patch I sent
upthread is doing?

Note that it is perfectly fine to do the changes incrementally, though
I'd rather add some proper coverage for each one of them using the
module I've patched (sepgsql's tests are annoying to setup and run).
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix documentation for max_wal_size and min_wal_size
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner