Re: plpgsql GUC variable: custom or built-in?

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> One reason to argue for the other way is that maybe it wouldn't only
>> be consulted by plpgsql. In particular I can easily imagine SQL
>> functions having the same issue as soon as someone gets around to
>> letting them use names for their parameters.

> I don't have a strong feeling on the core issue but I don't agree with
> this point. AIUI, we are implementing multiple behaviors here for
> reasons of backward and competing-product compatibility. Presumably,
> if we're starting from scratch, we'll pick a sensible behavior -
> probably error in the case of SQL - and stick with it.

Fair enough. I'll start writing the custom GUC then.

regards, tom lane