| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: enable new error fields in plpgsql (9.4) |
| Date: | 2013-02-01 13:43:37 |
| Message-ID: | 510BC689.2080902@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/1/13 8:00 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2013/2/1 Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to>:
>> On 2/1/13 1:47 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>
>>> now a most "hard" work is done and I would to enable access to new
>>> error fields from plpgsql.
>>
>>
>> Is there a compelling reason why we wouldn't provide these already in 9.3?
>
> a time for assign to last commitfest is out.
>
> this patch is relative simple and really close to enhanced error
> fields feature - but depends if some from commiters will have a time
> for commit to 9.3 - so I am expecting primary target 9.4, but I am not
> be angry if it will be commited early.
If we don't have access to those fields on PL/pgSQL, what was the point
of the patch to begin with? Surely, accessing them from C wasn't the
main use case?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2013-02-01 13:44:34 | obsolete code |
| Previous Message | Vlad Bailescu | 2013-02-01 13:40:43 | Re: Unusually high IO for autovacuum worker |