| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings |
| Date: | 2007-09-02 16:11:19 |
| Message-ID: | 7939.1188749479@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 9/2/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Seems a little verbose, but maybe we could do "SET var FROM CURRENT"
>> or "SET var FROM SESSION"?
> I'd prefer FROM SESSION then. FROM CURRENT seems unclear.
Actually, I think FROM SESSION is unclear, as it opens the question
whether the value to be applied is the session-wide setting or the
currently active one. Inside a transaction that has done SET LOCAL,
these are different things.
I think we pretty clearly want to have it take the currently active
setting, and I'd vote for FROM CURRENT as the best way of expressing
that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2007-09-02 17:54:52 | Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-09-02 16:08:00 | Re: Per-function GUC settings: trickier than it looked |