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

From Albe Laurenz
Subject Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
Date
Msg-id D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C2073C83D2@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at
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>)
Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> there is merged patch

Works fine, except that there are still missing const qualifiers
in copyfuncs.c and equalfuncs.c that lead to compiler warnings.

One thing I forgot to mention:
I thought there was a consensus to add a WITH() or OPTIONS() clause
to pass options to the checker function:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/12568.1322669638@sss.pgh.pa.us

I think this should be there so that the API does not have to be
changed in the future.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Is anybody actually using XLR_BKP_REMOVABLE?
Next
From: Julien Tachoires
Date:
Subject: Re: patch : Allow toast tables to be moved to a different tablespace