Tom Lane writes:
> > If it's only honored by SQL functions, then it should probably be called
> > check_sql_function_bodies.
>
> I thought about that while I was making the patch, but decided that it
> would be a very un-forward-looking name. Someday we will probably have
> syntax-checking validators for plpgsql, etc.
The point of this feature is to avoid failures because of forward
references in SQL code. A syntax-checking validator in anything but
possibly plpgsql will not even look at SQL code, so a validator for
a different language will only gain pain and confusion by respecting this
parameter. Perhaps it needs to different name altogether, along the lines
of "do not check SQL code in functions".
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net