Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of default - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of default
Date
Msg-id 26591.1087062248@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of default  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Responses Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> OK, attached is a file with the original function, and an overloaded one 
> that just takes table and column.  It searches your current search_path 
> to find the first matching table.

The right way to do this at the C level would be to use the same
infrastructure as nextval() does to accept arguments like 'foo' and
'"Foo"."Bar"'.  There's no reason to restrict the two-argument form
to the current search_path.

Given that you do that, I'm not sure that a three-argument form is even
needed.  AFAIR no one has asked for a two-argument form of nextval...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: Nested xacts: looking for testers and review
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: File leak?