From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Jing Wang <jingwangian(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE |
Date: | 2018-03-06 16:25:17 |
Message-ID: | 25566.1520353517@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> David Steele wrote:
>> Based on Tom's feedback, and hearing no opinions to the contrary, I have
>> marked this patch Rejected.
> I think I opine contrarywise, but I haven't made time to review the
> status of this in detail. I'm fine with keeping it rejected for now,
> but I reserve the option to revive it in the future.
I'm fine with reviving it if someone can find a way around the new-
reserved-word problem. But that's gonna be a bit hard given that
the patch wants to do
database_name:
ColId
| CURRENT_DATABASE
You might be able to preserve the accessibility of the current_database()
function by making CURRENT_DATABASE into a type_func_name_keyword instead
of a fully-reserved word. But that's ugly (I think you'd need a single-
purpose production for it to be used as a function), and you've still
broken any SQL code using "current_database" as a table or column name.
I'm dubious that the remaining use-case for the feature is worth it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Arthur Zakirov | 2018-03-06 16:27:21 | Re: Prefix operator for text and spgist support |
Previous Message | Robbie Harwood | 2018-03-06 16:25:13 | Re: Kerberos test suite |