Wed Feb 22 10:00:25 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] DDL replication (contuned) ...
- Next message: [Slony1-general] DDL replication ...
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 01:15:41PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > In the case where I'm looking to need this, the application is creating > tables on the fly, and no two tables necessarily have the same schema ... > don't ask, not my design, just having to support it :( If you check the original design discussions, you'll see that this case was _explicitly_ excluded from support. Jan regards such code, I seem to recall, as self-modifying, and regards it as an evil to be stamped out, not something to be propped up with replication. (He has rather strong views on this, in my experience. I can't say I feel so strongly about it, but I have to agree with him that it's not something to be encouraged.) A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs at crankycanuck.ca If they don't do anything, we don't need their acronym. --Josh Hamilton, on the US FEMA
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] DDL replication (contuned) ...
- Next message: [Slony1-general] DDL replication ...
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list