Re: invalid search_path complaints

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com> writes:
> > Personally, I feel that if unix will let you be stupid:
> > $ export PATH=/usr/bin:/this/invalid/crazy/path
> > $ echo $PATH
> > /usr/bin:/this/invalid/crazy/path
> > PG should trust that I'll get where I'm going eventually :)
>
> Well, that's an interesting analogy. Are you arguing that we should
> always accept any syntactically-valid search_path setting, no matter
> whether the mentioned schemas exist? It wouldn't be hard to do that.
>

I think we should always accept a syntactically valid search_path.

> The fun stuff comes in when you try to say "I want a warning in these
> contexts but not those", because (a) the behavior you think you want
> turns out to be pretty squishy, and (b) it's not always clear from the
> implementation level what the context is.
>

ISTM that just issuing a warning whenever you set the search_path (no
matter which context) feels valid (and better than the above *nix
behavior). I would personally be opposed to seeing it on login however.

--Scott

>
> regards, tom lane
>