Anonymous code blocks vs CREATE LANGUAGE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Anonymous code blocks vs CREATE LANGUAGE
Date: 2009-09-22 17:26:18
Message-ID: 13399.1253640378@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I'm going through the anonymous-code-blocks patch now. There are some
things missing, notably the ability to create a language with an
anonymous-code-block handler. The only way you can do it is to have
a pg_pltemplate entry, which is certainly not good enough for languages
not distributed with the core. The obvious solution is to add an
optional clause "INLINE function_name" to CREATE LANGUAGE, paralleling
the VALIDATOR clause. This'd require adding INLINE as a keyword.
(I assume it could be an unreserved keyword, but haven't actually tried
yet.) Does anyone object to that plan, or want to propose a different
keyword?

Also, I'm pretty strongly tempted to get rid of the obsolete LANCOMPILER
option while at it, and thereby remove that keyword. That option hasn't
even been documented since 7.1, and didn't do anything useful for
several versions before that. So it's pretty hard to believe anyone's
still using it.

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2009-09-22 17:29:21 Re: [PATCH] Largeobject access controls
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2009-09-22 17:06:43 Re: Hot Standby 0.2.1