From: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Lexically-scoped options |
Date: | 2018-03-18 18:21:03 |
Message-ID: | 5AAEAE0F.20006@anastigmatix.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The SQL standard overloads WITH in a query to supply not only CTEs
but also lexically-scoped option settings:
WITH XMLBINARY BASE64, foo(bar) AS (VALUES('\xDEADBEEF'::bytea))
SELECT XMLELEMENT(name foo, XMLATTRIBUTES(bar)) FROM foo;
PG already implements XMLBINARY and XMLOPTION using the GUC system.
Would it be easy or hard, reasonable or objectionable, to generalize
PG's WITH syntax along these lines, rewriting it into lexically-scoped
settings of GUCs?
Perhaps a further development in the same line would be enabling the planner
to choose among IMMUTABLE specializations of a function, as well as a
generic STABLE version that depends on a GUC.
-Chap
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-03-18 19:24:07 | include/pgtar.h is missing include guards? |
Previous Message | Christos Maris | 2018-03-18 17:58:26 | Re: Google Summer of Code: Potential Applicant |