| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: So, are we going to bump catversion for beta5, or not? |
| Date: | 2003-10-23 08:56:14 |
| Message-ID: | 200310230956.14928.dev@archonet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 20:12, scott.marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> > It would probably be a good idea to allow the function's search path to
> > be explicitly specified as a clause of CREATE FUNCTION (otherwise it
> > will be a headache for pg_dump). So we could allow both viewpoints,
> > if there is a way to explicitly say "don't force any search path".
> > Perhaps specifying an empty path could mean that. But I think the
> > default should be to adopt the current search path (at the time of
> > CREATE FUNCTION) as the function's permanent path.
>
> It might be nice to have an alter function capability that could change
> the search path at a later date should one add schema etc... later on.
If it's part of CREATE FUNCTION then presumably CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION
would let you do that (it's not changing the signature of the function, so I
can't think why not).
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yuval Lieberman | 2003-10-23 09:00:52 | Failed to create temporary file |
| Previous Message | Tommi Maekitalo | 2003-10-23 08:29:15 | pg_ctl reports succes when start fails |