Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
Date
Msg-id 27980.1323790650@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2011/12/13 Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>:
>> Either that, or couldn't you pass an option List as data type "internal"?

> this is question - internal is most simply solution, but then we
> cannot to call check function directly

Yeah, one of the proposals for allowing people to specify complicated
conditions about what to check was to tell them to doselect checker(oid) from pg_proc where any-random-condition;
If the checker isn't user-callable then we lose that escape hatch, and
the only selection conditions that will ever be possible are the ones
we take the trouble to shoehorn into the CHECK FUNCTION statement.
Doesn't seem like a good thing to me.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Torello Querci
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_cancel_backend by non-superuser
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: JSON for PG 9.2