Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marko Kreen
Subject Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
Date
Msg-id e51f66da0709020842l1ee5040er317a0eb525e3a74c@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
List pgsql-hackers
On 9/2/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Marko Kreen" <markokr@gmail.com> writes:
> > On 9/1/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> One problem is that we'd have to make CURRENT a reserved word to make it
> >> work exactly like that.  Can anyone think of a variant syntax that
> >> doesn't need a new reserved word?
>
> > SET var FROM CURRENT SESSION
>
> Seems a little verbose, but maybe we could do "SET var FROM CURRENT"
> or "SET var FROM SESSION"?

I'd prefer FROM SESSION then.  FROM CURRENT seems unclear.

> One point worth noting here is that this'd more or less automatically
> apply to ALTER USER SET and ALTER DATABASE SET as well ... not sure
> how much use-case there is for those, but it'd fall out ...

Does not seem to be a problem.

-- 
marko


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GIST and GIN indexes on varchar[] aren't working in CVS.
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Per-function GUC settings: trickier than it looked