Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRAHvdY1GymFji_WY0wZk=1vFj5bqAy-_h5JHnWS27kenQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement ("Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello > > You have the option "fatal_errors" for the checker function, but you > special case it in CheckFunction(CheckFunctionStmt *stmt) and turn > errors to warnings if it is not set. > > Wouldn't it be better to have the checker function ereport a WARNING > or an ERROR depending on the setting? Options should be handled by the > checker function. > A would to process fatal_errors out of checker function - just it is more robust. This flag has not too sense in plpgsql - but can have a more sense in other languages. But I'll think again about flags note about warnings and errors. Warnings are useless on checker function level, because they are just shown, but they cannot be trapped. maybe result based on tuplestore can be better - I have to look on it. Regards Pavel > Yours, > Laurenz Albe
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: