Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues
От | Andrew Gierth |
---|---|
Тема | Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87hc1lvsqb.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: Tom> I doubt that we want to decorate every CREATE statement we'veTom> got with an optional MODULE clause; to name just oneobjection,Tom> it'd probably be impossible to do so without making MODULE aTom> fully reserved word. Tom> What was discussed in the last go-round was some sort ofTom> state-dependent assignment of a module context. You couldTom>imagine either[snip] Tom> or something along the lines of Tom> SET current_module = modname; Tom> CREATE this;Tom> CREATE that;Tom> CREATE the_other; Tom> SET current_module = null; Tom> which is really more or less the same thing except that it makesTom> the state concrete in the form of an examinablevariable. InTom> either case you'd need to define how the state would interactTom> with transactions and errors. I like the SET version better. As for transactions and errors, I think that installing a module should be done inside a transaction anyway; and the usual GUC mechanisms should handle it if it was done using SET LOCAL, no? -- Andrew.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: