Re: [PATCH] SQL assertions prototype

On 12/18/2013 11:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 12/18/2013 02:45 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2013-12-18 16:39:58 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> It would only force serialization for transactions that modify tables
>>>> covered by the assert, that doesn't seem to bad. Anything covered by an
>>>> assert shoulnd't be modified frequently, otherwise you'll run into
>>>> major
>>>> performance problems.
>>> Well, as presented there is no way (for the system) to tell which tables
>>> are covered by an assertion, is there?  That's my point.
>> Well, the patch's syntax seems to only allow to directly specify a SQL
>> query to check - we could iterate over the querytree to gather all
>> related tables and reject any function we do not understand.
>
> Umm, that's really a major limitation in utility.

The query can be "SELECT is_my_assertion_true()", and the function can 
do anything.

- Heikki