<p dir="ltr">I dislike it. a too early check means a issues with temporary tables and mainy new dependency between
functionsin complex projects. It is some what we don't want.<div class="gmail_quote">Dne 12. 12. 2013 5:30 "Amit
Kapila"<<a href="mailto:amit.kapila16@gmail.com">amit.kapila16@gmail.com</a>> napsal(a):<br type="attribution"
/><blockquoteclass="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Wed, Dec 11,
2013at 10:40 AM, Tom Lane <<a href="mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us">tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us</a>> wrote:<br /> > Amit
Kapila<<a href="mailto:amit.kapila16@gmail.com">amit.kapila16@gmail.com</a>> writes:<br /> >> On Tue, Dec
10,2013 at 12:15 PM, Pavel Stehule <<a href="mailto:pavel.stehule@gmail.com">pavel.stehule@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br/> >>> Now, PG has no any tool for checking dependency between functions and other<br /> >>>
objects.<br/> ><br /> >> Isn't that already done for SQL function's (fmgr_sql_validator)?<br /> ><br />
>Pavel's point is that the only way to find out if the validator will fail<br /> > is to run it and see if it
fails;and even if it does, how much will you<br /> > know about why?<br /><br /> One of the important thing at
timeof function creation, users are<br /> interested in knowing<br /> is that if there are any objects
(table/view/sequence..) that are<br /> used in function body<br /> and are missing and the reason is I think they
don'twant such<br /> things to come up during execution.<br /><br /> Similar thing happens for prepared statements
inPostgreSQL, like<br /> at time of parse message<br /> only it checks both syntax errors and semantic check (which
ensures<br/> statement is meaningful,<br /> for ex. whether objects and columns used in the statements exist)<br
/><br/> Like we do checks other than syntax check at time of creation of<br /> prepared statement, same<br />
thingshould be considered meaning full at time of function creation.<br /><br /> As you mentioned, there are checks
(likedependency, mutual<br /> recursion) which are difficult or not<br /> feasible in current design to perform, but
sowill be the case for<br /> them to execute during first execution<br /> of function. So is it not better to do
whatis more feasible during<br /> function creation rather than leaving<br /> most of the things at execution
phase?<br/><br /><br /> With Regards,<br /> Amit Kapila.<br /> EnterpriseDB: <a href="http://www.enterprisedb.com"
target="_blank">http://www.enterprisedb.com</a><br/></blockquote></div>