Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate
Date
Msg-id 18870.1018560401@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Why shouldn't aggregate functions have entries in pg_proc?  Then one
>> search would cover both possibilities, and we could eliminate some
>> duplicate code in the parser.

> Furthermore, we could make the new function privileges apply to aggregates
> as well.

GRANT/REVOKE FUNCTION will now work on aggregate functions too (is there
any value in making a variant syntax for aggregates?).  However, I
didn't implement enforcement of the EXECUTE privilege yet.  I was
slightly bemused to notice that your implementation of it for regular
functions tests the privilege at plan startup but doesn't actually throw
the error until the function is called.  What's the point of that?
Seems like we might as well throw the error in init_fcache and not
bother with storing a boolean.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Barry Lind
Date:
Subject: Re: 7.3 schedule
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: numeric/decimal docs bug?