From: | Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Make CREATE AGGREGATE check validity of initcond value? |
Date: | 2012-10-04 16:48:42 |
Message-ID: | CAJKUy5gbLH=zeFpAxcrNNDq05LgfqU92A-cgd5fLY756pO6p3Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
El 03/10/2012 21:38, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> escribió:
>
> Does anyone have an objection to this? I can imagine cases where the
> check would reject values that would get accepted at runtime, if the
> type's input function was sensitive to the phase of the moon or
> something. But it doesn't seem very probable, whereas checking the
> value seems like an eminently useful thing to do. Or maybe I'm just
> overreacting to the report --- I can't recall any previous complaints
> like this, so maybe entering a bogus initcond is a corner case too.
I guess a wrong initcond value, probably is a pilot error.
So, my first reaction is +1 to make it an error.
But if you feel there a corner cases maybe at least a warning
--
Jaime Casanova
2ndQuadrant: Your PostgreSQL partner
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-10-04 17:07:18 | Re: Promoting a standby during base backup (was Re: Switching timeline over streaming replication) |
Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2012-10-04 16:34:08 | Re: PQping command line tool |