Re: GRANT on functions/languages

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GRANT on functions/languages
Date: 2002-10-10 05:05:24
Message-ID: 24974.1034226324@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I was looking for consistency so we could have things ready if we
> tighten up in 7.4. I believe someone volunteered to fix them all so I
> figured we should do that.

Someone did volunteer, but I haven't seen results. My point is that
it's not important as things stand. If anyone wants to go through the
contrib functions and introduce some consistency, it would be much more
useful to check their strictness and volatility attributes ... not to
mention converting them all to v1 call convention for portability's sake
...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-10-10 06:51:16 Re: inline newNode()
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-10 04:56:54 Re: GRANT on functions/languages