| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Darcy Buskermolen <darcy(at)wavefire(dot)com>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of default |
| Date: | 2004-06-12 17:44:08 |
| Message-ID: | 26591.1087062248@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> OK, attached is a file with the original function, and an overloaded one
> that just takes table and column. It searches your current search_path
> to find the first matching table.
The right way to do this at the C level would be to use the same
infrastructure as nextval() does to accept arguments like 'foo' and
'"Foo"."Bar"'. There's no reason to restrict the two-argument form
to the current search_path.
Given that you do that, I'm not sure that a three-argument form is even
needed. AFAIR no one has asked for a two-argument form of nextval...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-12 19:30:30 | pgsql-server: Some editorializing on 7.4.3 release notes. |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-06-12 10:12:37 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of default |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-12 17:50:09 | Re: File leak? |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2004-06-12 17:27:15 | Re: Nested xacts: looking for testers and review |