Horton

Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement

Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>

View thread
From: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
To: "Pavel Stehule *EXTERN*" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tom Lane *EXTERN*" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-12-03T11:02:13Z
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 wrote:
>> My attempt at a syntax that could also cover Peter's wish for multiple
>> checker functions:
>>
>> CHECK FUNCTION { func(args) | ALL [IN SCHEMA schema] [FOR ROLE user] }
>>  [ USING check_function ] OPTIONS (optname optarg [, ...])

> check_function should be related to one language, so you have to
> specify language if you would to specify check_function (if we would
> to have more check functions for one language).

Right, I forgot LANGUAGE:

CHECK FUNCTION { func(args) | ALL IN LANGUAGE pl [IN SCHEMA schema] [FOR ROLE user] }
 [ USING check_function ] OPTIONS (optname optarg [, ...])

If func(args) is given, the language can be inferred.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe