Re: [v9.2] LEAKPROOF attribute of FUNCTION (Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem)

2012/2/14 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I could not find out where is the origin of grammer conflicts, although
>> it does not conflict with any options within ALTER FUNCTION.
>>
>> Do you think the idea of ALTER ... NOT LEAKPROOF should be
>> integrated within v9.2 timeline also?
>
> Yes.  Did you notice that I attached a patch to make that work?  I'll
> commit that today or tomorrow unless someone comes up with a better
> solution.
>
Yes. I'll be available to work on the feature based on this patch.
It was a headache of mine to implement alter statement to add/remove
leakproof attribute.

>>> I also think we ought to stick create_function_3 into one of the
>>> parallel groups in the regression tests, if possible.  Can you
>>> investigate that?
>>>
>> Not yet. This test does not have dependency with other tests,
>> so, I'm optimistic to run create_function_3 concurrently.
>
> Me, too.
>
I tried to move create_function_3 into the group of create_view and
create_index, then it works correctly.

Thanks,
--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>