From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: default_language |
Date: | 2010-01-24 21:12:33 |
Message-ID: | 1264367553.29919.293.camel@jdavis |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 20:32 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Or "language_path" so we can tell
> CREATE FUNCTION to try the languages in order? Or better still, try all
> the installed languages that the user has rights to in alphabetic
> order?
What do you mean "try"? It seems a little dangerous to just try to
compile until it doesn't throw an error.
Consider the following program:
len('aaaaaaaaaaaaaa')
Is that ruby or python? It's probably python, because python has a
built-in function "len". However, ruby doesn't know that the "len"
function doesn't exist until runtime -- so perhaps it's just a ruby
program that happens to throw a runtime error?
I would actually lean the other way and say that we shouldn't be
introducing behavior-changing GUCs (except for the special case of
supporting legacy behavior, like standard_conforming_strings). If we
have a default (for DO and CREATE FUNCTION), why not hard-wire the
default to plpgsql?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-01-24 21:20:11 | Re: default_language |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-24 21:04:35 | Re: further explain changes |