Re: Assertion failure on UNLOGGED VIEW and SEQUENCE
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Assertion failure on UNLOGGED VIEW and SEQUENCE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21212.1298041367@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Assertion failure on UNLOGGED VIEW and SEQUENCE (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Assertion failure on UNLOGGED VIEW and SEQUENCE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Itagaki Takahiro >> The most easiest fix would be preventing them in parser level. > Well, that sucks. I had intended for that to be disallowed at the > parser level, but obviously I fail. It seems that disallowing this in > the parser will require duplicating the OptTemp production. Or > alternatively we can just add an error check to the CREATE VIEW and > CREATE SEQUENCE productions, i.e. > if ($4 == RELPERSISTENCE_UNLOGGED) > ereport(ERROR, ...); > I am somewhat leaning toward the latter option, to avoid unnecessarily > bloating the size of the parser tables, but I can do it the other way > if people prefer. If by the first option you mean causing the failure report to be "syntax error" rather than anything more specific, then I agree that option sucks. I'd actually vote for putting the error test somewhere in statement execution code, well downstream of gram.y. The parser's job is to produce a parse tree, not to encapsulate knowledge about which combinations of options are supported. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: