chkpass_in should not be volatile
...or at least according to the warning message:
postgres=# CREATE EXTENSION chkpass ;
WARNING: type input function chkpass_in should not be volatile
Thom
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
...or at least according to the warning message:
postgres=# CREATE EXTENSION chkpass ;
WARNING: type input function chkpass_in should not be volatile
See thread here:
/messages/by-id/CACfv+pL2oX08SSZSoaHpyC=UbfTFmPt4UmVEKJTH7y=2QMRCBw@mail.gmail.com
Given the lack of complaints so far, maybe we could think about redefining
the behavior of chkpass_in. I'm not very sure to what, though.
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
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
...or at least according to the warning message:
postgres=# CREATE EXTENSION chkpass ;
WARNING: type input function chkpass_in should not be volatileSee thread here:
/messages/by-id/CACfv+pL2oX08SSZSoaHpyC=UbfTFmPt4UmVEKJTH7y=2QMRCBw@mail.gmail.com
Given the lack of complaints so far, maybe we could think about redefining
the behavior of chkpass_in. I'm not very sure to what, though.
Thom, how did you end up encountering this?
While it seems to have resulted in the right effect (here) maybe we could
have written: "WARNING: If you are reading this please email
pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org" and mention checkpass_in volatility in the
subject." instead
David J.
On 3 June 2016 at 15:26, David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
...or at least according to the warning message:
postgres=# CREATE EXTENSION chkpass ;
WARNING: type input function chkpass_in should not be volatileSee thread here:
/messages/by-id/CACfv+pL2oX08SSZSoaHpyC=UbfTFmPt4UmVEKJTH7y=2QMRCBw@mail.gmail.com
Given the lack of complaints so far, maybe we could think about redefining
the behavior of chkpass_in. I'm not very sure to what, though.Thom, how did you end up encountering this?
I built the extension and tried to create it. Not really anything other
than that.
Thom
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
On 3 June 2016 at 15:26, David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
wrote:On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
...or at least according to the warning message:
postgres=# CREATE EXTENSION chkpass ;
WARNING: type input function chkpass_in should not be volatileSee thread here:
/messages/by-id/CACfv+pL2oX08SSZSoaHpyC=UbfTFmPt4UmVEKJTH7y=2QMRCBw@mail.gmail.com
Given the lack of complaints so far, maybe we could think about
redefining
the behavior of chkpass_in. I'm not very sure to what, though.Thom, how did you end up encountering this?
I built the extension and tried to create it. Not really anything other
than that.
I guess, "what was the motivation for creating the extension" would have
been a better question. Just a test suite for completeness or something
application-level?
David J.