| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: default_language |
| Date: | 2010-01-24 23:18:00 |
| Message-ID: | 1264375080.13571.5.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 17:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > If we have a default (for DO and CREATE FUNCTION), why not hard-wire the
> > default to plpgsql?
>
> I don't see any strong argument for having a default for CREATE
> FUNCTION. The original argument for having a GUC for DO was that
> plpgsql wasn't built in; now that it is, I think a case could
> be made for dropping default_do_language in favor of a hardwired
> default.
I would prefer having the option, but removing it completely does at
least solve the bizarre inconsistency I've highlighted.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2010-01-24 23:45:38 | Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO on inherited columns |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-24 23:03:11 | Re: Streaming Replication on win32 |