Horton

Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-12-13T15:37:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add const qualifiers to node inspection functions

Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2011/12/13 Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>:
>> Either that, or couldn't you pass an option List as data type "internal"?

> this is question - internal is most simply solution, but then we
> cannot to call check function directly

Yeah, one of the proposals for allowing people to specify complicated
conditions about what to check was to tell them to do
	select checker(oid) from pg_proc where any-random-condition;
If the checker isn't user-callable then we lose that escape hatch, and
the only selection conditions that will ever be possible are the ones
we take the trouble to shoehorn into the CHECK FUNCTION statement.
Doesn't seem like a good thing to me.

			regards, tom lane