Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update
Date
Msg-id dcc563d10911241054p9307a5fg52b4581420615b3f@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> But actually I thought we had more or less concluded that CREATE OR
>>> REPLACE LANGUAGE would be acceptable (perhaps only if it's given
>>> without any extra args?).
>
>> I'm not sure there's any value in that restriction - seems more
>> confusing than helpful.
>
> The point would be to reduce the risk that you're changing the language
> definition in a surprising way.  Extra args would imply that you're
> trying to install a non-default definition of the language.

But if you'd installed it that way before, wouldn't you then need the
arguments this time to have them match?

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update