On mån, 2010-01-25 at 20:26 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 09:30 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > >> +1 for removing default_do_language, too. > > > +1 for removing default_do_language OR adding default_language. > > > I prefer a hard-wired default of PLpgSQL, so a missing language > > statement on a DO block is always interpreted the same. > > So it seems everyone is okay with the latter? (Remove > default_do_language in place of a hard-wired default of "plpgsql", > don't change CREATE FUNCTION's behavior.)
I reserve the option to propose making LANGUAGE SQL the default for CREATE FUNCTION in 9.1, but it's not something we have to worry about now. ;-) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
