Hi all.
Can functions whose effect is to create functions (yep!)
be labelled as stable?
Thanks.
--
Vincenzo Romano
--
Maybe Computer will never become as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
---(end of
2007/5/31, Vincenzo Romano [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all.
Can functions whose effect is to create functions (yep!)
be labelled as stable?
According to the docs, no.
STABLE indicates that the function cannot modify the database (...)
any function that has side-effects must be classified volatile
On Thursday 31 May 2007 13:23:36 Filip Rembiałkowski wrote:
2007/5/31, Vincenzo Romano [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all.
Can functions whose effect is to create functions (yep!)
be labelled as stable?
According to the docs, no.
STABLE indicates that the function cannot modify the database
2007/5/31, Vincenzo Romano [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Nonetheless your remark makes a lot of sense and I'm still in dubt.
In my case the creatorfunc has no parameters and returns void as it reads
data from configuration tables.
And it should be OK if ti were run only once.
AFAIK, the only practical
Vincenzo Romano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
quote
STABLE indicates that the function cannot modify the database,
They talk about table scans which should not involce the information schema
tables, the only tables that get modified by a fubction whose sole effect it
to create other
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 08:56:23PM +0200, Rafal Pietrak wrote:
Apparently there is also no way to foreign key reference those, even
without installing any on-delete actions/triggers.
Pity.
Are there any plans for anything like that (referencing keys in system
tables from public schemas)?
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 11:47 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
What may have a better chance is assigning triggers to commands (like ON
CREATE USER) which trigger on specific situations. No-one serious
considered implementing this though, at it's unclear what the use-case
would be anyway...
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:38:08PM +0200, Rafal Pietrak wrote:
My particular need was to have the ability to block the account until
its password is changed. Which I believe might (at certain point) come
into the main sources. But other applicatoins may have unforseen
requirements - It would
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 08:56:23PM +0200, Rafal Pietrak wrote:
Are there any plans for anything like that (referencing keys in system
tables from public schemas)?
Not really. The primary objection is that every lookup in the backend
on the
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 10:34:30AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
catalogs. I can only recall people ever asking for this feature in
connection with the user/group catalogs, so covering those might be
enough in practice; that'd certainly be lots less invasive than trying
to make it work everywhere.
Hi All,
May be someone can help me with the following problem:
1. I need to extend 'featurs' of database user account.
2. I did that by creating a table:
CREATE TABLE users (username text, -- key matching 'current_user'
freaturs text -- thing I need
);
3. I allow acces to that table
Rafal Pietrak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
5. one of the procedures is:
CREATE FUNCTION kill(text) RETURNS boolean as $$ SET ROLE
MASTER_OF_THE_UNIVERSE; EXECUTE 'DROP USER ' || quote_ident($1); reset
role; return true; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql STABLE;
You should use the SECURITY DEFINER property
On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 10:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
1. I used the STABLE keyword to tell executor to evaluate the function
just once per statement.
Wrong. STABLE is not a directive to the system, it is a promise about
the behavior of your function ... and you're trying to break the
13 matches
Mail list logo
