Re: plpgsql and Schemas

From: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plpgsql and Schemas
Date: 2002-07-15 01:27:11
Message-ID: 1026696432.30427.188.camel@jester
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 2002-07-14 at 21:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> writes:
> > I've been running a few functions within schema's. It's annoying that
> > everything needs to be qualified as it doesn't allow the functions to be
> > moved very easily.
> > Would it be appropriate for the function to have it's own schema as
> > pre-pended onto the user path while in the users function?
>
> Hmm. I can think of examples where you wouldn't want that (because
> the function *should* see the caller's namespace) about as easily
> as cases where you would.
>
> If a function wants to access "its own schema", why shouldn't it
> use qualified references?

I was thinking of the effort put into pg_dump to prevent over qualifying
references in order to allow the user to move stuff easily. It's not a
big deal, but does prevent this ability with functions.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-07-15 03:45:44 More DROP COLUMN
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-07-15 01:19:34 Re: plpgsql and Schemas