To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
cc: Petr Jelinek <pjmodos@pjmodos.net>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema 
In-reply-to: <20090820190604.GK6261@alvh.no-ip.org> 
References: <4A86B5D5.6060807@dunslane.net> <4A871F46.1040002@agliodbs.com>
	<5D5ECAE0-F2B0-479B-9594-50AAF18F10ED@hi-media.com>
	<20090815223102.GS5407@samason.me.uk>
	<1250378139.18992.6.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
	<603c8f070908152051mbd1d706hb0e29f5cfaf2f151@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A87854B.3070707@dunslane.net>
	<1250427428.26280.2.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
	<395.1250439160@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4A8D9CA0.1040607@pjmodos.net>
	<20090820190604.GK6261@alvh.no-ip.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
	message dated "Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:06:04 -0400"
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 10:26:50 -0400
Message-ID: <3493.1250864810@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> The implementation as I see it would create function in pg_temp
>> namespace, call it and then drop it. Any other implementation would
>> imho mean rewriting procedure language api.

> That's really ugly.  It'll cause catalog bloat with every execution.
> I think it would be acceptable to have a new column in pg_language that
> pointed to an anonymous block execute function.  Languages that do not
> define this function cannot use this new feature.

+1.  The other way would also (presumably) mean invoking the language's
validate procedure, which might well be redundant and in any case would
probably not have exactly the error-reporting behavior one would want.
I think it's better if the language knows it's dealing with an anonymous
block.  You could even imagine the language relaxing its rules a bit,
for instance not requiring an outer BEGIN/END in plpgsql.

			regards, tom lane