Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> On the whole, it might not be a bad idea to have two allowed signatures
>> for the validator function, rather than inventing an additional column
>> in pg_language. But the fundamental point IMHO is that there needs to
>> be a provision to pass language-dependent validation options to the
>> function, whether it's the existing validator or a separate checker
>> entry point.
> Something like:
> CHECK FUNCTION proname(proargs) WITH (...fdw-style elastic options...)
Great minds think alike ... that was pretty much exactly the syntax that
was in the back of my mind.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
