From: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Syntax decisions for pl/pgsql RAISE extension |
Date: | 2008-05-12 18:11:19 |
Message-ID: | 162867790805121111p6d56f603te8432adc2168c70d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2008/5/12 Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>:
>>>> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Now, the elephant in the room is the issue of Oracle compatibility.
>> None of this looks anything even a little bit like Oracle's RAISE
>> command. Oracle allows
>> RAISE exception_name ;
>> RAISE ;
>
> I'm probably in the minority, but I care more about SQL/PSM
> compatibility than Oracle compatibility. I would hope that the ISO
> standard is at least a gorilla sitting in the corner of the room.
>
> If it's not too impractical, a nod toward these would be good:
>
> DECLARE condition-name CONDITION FOR SQLSTATE VALUE character-literal
>
> SIGNAL condition-name
>
> -Kevin
plpgsql can't be SQL/PSM compatible - it's goal other language
plpgpsm, and there is condition declared via standard.
Pavel
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-05-12 18:15:18 | Re: Syntax decisions for pl/pgsql RAISE extension |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-05-12 18:10:50 | Re: Syntax decisions for pl/pgsql RAISE extension |