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

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRD2ka8epjJJg5KDUJXHEo+jDRCjhW6pCeDZeK4FLwrQEA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
2011/12/2 Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>:
> Hello
>
>>
>> My attempt at a syntax that could also cover Peter's wish for multiple
>> checker functions:
>>
>> CHECK FUNCTION { func(args) | ALL [IN SCHEMA schema] [FOR ROLE user] }
>>  [ USING check_function ] OPTIONS (optname optarg [, ...])
>>
>

some other idea about other using CHECK FUNCTION

CHECK FUNCTION func(args)
RETURNS ... AS $$

$$ LANGUAGE xxx

This should to do check of function body without affect on registered
function. This is addition to previous defined syntax.

Nice a day

Pavel


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Inlining comparators as a performance optimisation
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf