Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Imperfect solutions

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Imperfect solutions
Date: 2001-06-01 04:45:45
Message-ID: 200106010445.f514jjb26575@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > I think there are a few rules we can use to decide how to deal with
> > imperfect solutions:
> 
> You forgot
> 
> * will the fix institutionalize user-visible behavior that will in the
>   long run be considered the wrong thing?
> 
> * will the fix contort new code that is written in the same vicinity,
>   thereby making it harder and harder to replace as time goes on?
> 
> The first of these is the core of my concern about %TYPE.

I was thinking about this.  Seems if we want to emulate Oracle, we have
to make %TYPE visible the way it is implemented in the patch.  We can
make it track table changes or not, but it doesn't seem we have much
latitude in how we make it visible to users.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Pascal ScheffersDate: 2001-06-01 06:15:39
Subject: Re: Support for %TYPE in CREATE FUNCTION
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-06-01 00:58:34
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] extra syntax on INSERT

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group