On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:26:14PM -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.)
The whole default_to_language thing seems like a great way to have spooky breakage at a distance, so +1 for removing it. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
