| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: default_language |
| Date: | 2010-01-25 08:55:40 |
| Message-ID: | 1264409740.13571.48.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 09:08 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On sön, 2010-01-24 at 20:32 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > Why do we have a parameter called "default_do_language" when we don't
> > have a parameter called "default_language"?
>
> According to the SQL standard, the default language for CREATE FUNCTION
> is SQL. Should we implement that?
So the SQL Standard supports the concept of a default language?
So should we, though giving the user the choice of what the default
should be, standard or otherwise.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-01-25 08:56:33 | Re: Re: pgsql: In HS, Startup process sets SIGALRM when waiting for buffer pin. |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-01-25 08:49:37 | Re: Re: pgsql: In HS, Startup process sets SIGALRM when waiting for buffer pin. |