Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3
| От | Jim Nasby | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3 | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 52A61115.6040305@nasby.net обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3 (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
On 12/8/13 11:24 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > #option check_on_first_start > > #option check_on_create > > #option check_newer > > what exactly check_newer means, does it mean whenever a function is > replaced (changed)? > > > no, it means, so request for check will be ignored ever - some functions cannot be deeply checked due using dynamic SQLor dynamic created data types - temporary tables created in functions. So presumably it would be check_never, not check_newer... :) BTW, it's not terribly hard to work around the temp table issue;you just need to create the expected table in the session when you create the function. But even in this case, I thinkit would still be good to check what we can, like at least basic plpgsql syntax. Do we really need first_start? ISTM that if you're dependent on run state then you're basically out of luck. -- Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim@nasby.net 512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: