Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not?
| От | Lukas Smith |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4456858B.40703@pooteeweet.org обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:25:33AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> mark@mark.mielke.cc writes: >>> Ah. I was wondering about that. When I saw the first poster tag >>> 'SECURITY DEFINER' on the end of the expression I assumed it was >>> something that I didn't know you could do... :-) >> No, he was inventing syntax that doesn't exist. > > Which begs the question, how hard would it be to add that syntax? I > suspect it would be useful in cases besides sequences, and certainly > seems to be a lot less of a hassle than having to wrap stuff in an extra > function just to get that capability... In all the internal purity and technical concerns it helps PostGreSQL to have an easy migration path for MySQL refugees. Anyways I think its quite clear that there is more need for a black box than a macro. regards, Lukas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: