Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
Cc: dinesh kumar <dineshkumar02(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message
Date: 2015-07-13 21:12:51
Message-ID: 15578.1436821971@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> writes:
> On 7/13/15 3:39 PM, dinesh kumar wrote:
>> Ah. It's' my bad interpretation. Let me work on it, and will send a new
>> patch as a wrapper sql function for ereport.

> You might want to present a plan for that; it's not as trivial as it
> sounds due to how ereport works. In particular, I'd want to see (at
> minimum) the same functionality that plpgsql's RAISE command now
> provides (errdetail, errhint, etc).

The real question is why the existing functionality in plpgsql isn't
sufficient. Somebody who wants a "log from SQL" function can easily
write a simple plpgsql function that does exactly what they want,
with no more or fewer bells-n-whistles than they need. If we try
to create a SQL function that does all that, it's likely to be a mess
to use, even with named arguments.

I'm not necessarily against the basic idea, but I think inventing
something that actually offers an increment in usability compared
to the existing alternative is going to be harder than it sounds.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-07-13 21:16:51 Re: [DESIGN] Incremental checksums
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2015-07-13 21:04:02 Re: PostgreSQL 9.5 Alpha 1 build fail with perl 5.22