Re: PLpgsql debugger question

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PLpgsql debugger question
Date: 2007-11-15 16:34:47
Message-ID: 20071115083447.4f92daa0@scratch
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:00:36 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Something like that could work well for modules that are moderately
> independent of the core database version. I'm afraid that won't be
> true for the plpgsql debugger, unfortunately --- it needs to know all
> about plpgsql's internal data structures, and thus for example will
> need an update every time we invent a new plpgsql statement or
> feature.'

They don't have to do this. They could simply state that 1.0 is for
8.1, 2.0 is for 8.2, 3.0 is for 8.3.

We don't back patch features, why should they?

Don't get me wrong the debugger is certainly useful but I see no
technical argument (and I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong :))
that deems it needs to be in core.

Joshua D. Drake

- --

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHPHUtATb/zqfZUUQRArwkAJsGjCEXEL2Kfgx1oDbGKL8SpbYqTgCdE080
BVjFWDS8gMeg8CtSOg98jDg=
=wM0M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Caduto 2007-11-15 16:41:23 Re: PLpgsql debugger question
Previous Message Reg Me Please 2007-11-15 16:34:43 Re: Variable LIMIT and OFFSET in SELECTs