Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update
Date: 2009-11-24 18:34:22
Message-ID: 20970.1259087662@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> But actually I thought we had more or less concluded that CREATE OR
>> REPLACE LANGUAGE would be acceptable (perhaps only if it's given
>> without any extra args?).

> I'm not sure there's any value in that restriction - seems more
> confusing than helpful.

The point would be to reduce the risk that you're changing the language
definition in a surprising way. Extra args would imply that you're
trying to install a non-default definition of the language.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2009-11-24 18:54:37 Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-11-24 18:26:14 Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-11-24 18:46:19 Re: garbage in psql -l
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2009-11-24 18:32:05 Re: garbage in psql -l