| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: invalid search_path complaints |
| Date: | 2012-04-04 16:02:35 |
| Message-ID: | 27528.1333555355@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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.
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.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Mead | 2012-04-04 16:12:45 | Re: invalid search_path complaints |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-04-04 15:59:07 | Re: Question regarding SSL code in backend and frontend |