| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update |
| Date: | 2009-11-23 05:32:45 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10911222132n7a5440bauecb76185272e1fd@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Part of the motivation for allowing inline blocks was to allow for
>> conditional logic.
>
> I don't think that argument really applies to this case, because the
> complaint was about not being sure if plpgsql is installed. If it
> isn't, you can hardly use a plpgsql DO block to fix it.
>
> (Is anyone up for revisiting the perennial topic of whether to install
> plpgsql by default? Andrew's argument does suggest that DO might offer
> a new consideration in that tradeoff.)
One non-coding vote for yes.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2009-11-23 05:41:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-23 05:19:14 | Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2009-11-23 05:41:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-23 05:30:43 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove -w (--ignore-all-space) option from pg_regress's diff |