Re: PL/PgSQL STRICT

From: Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PL/PgSQL STRICT
Date: 2012-12-21 16:32:23
Message-ID: 50D48F17.7040705@joh.to
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/21/12 5:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to> writes:
>> Another idea would be to force the STRICT to be immediately after
>> INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE.
>
> What about before it, ie
>
> STRICT UPDATE ...
>
> This should dodge the problem of possible conflict with table names,
> and it seems to me to read more naturally too.

Yeah, putting STRICT after the command wouldn't work for UPDATE.

I like this one best so far, so I'm going with this syntax for the next
version of the patch.

Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2012-12-21 16:35:52 Re: Event Triggers: adding information
Previous Message Marko Tiikkaja 2012-12-21 16:29:56 Re: PL/PgSQL STRICT