| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement |
| Date: | 2014-11-19 11:35:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKCabr2QayM=7HcyAK8o4w5o2=P-h8fuoS8w2pBCEJs-w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 18 November 2014 21:19, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Personally, I see this as natural extension of the conditional block control
> which we already have for loops with CONTINUE WHEN and EXIT WHEN. This
> basically extends it to any block and it seems quite natural to have it for
> me...
That's a reasonable argument to include it.
I seem to share the same opinion with Andrew: its not going to hurt to
include this, but its not gonna cause dancing in the streets either. I
would characterize that as 2 very neutral and unimpressed people, plus
3 in favour. Which seems enough to commit.
Perhaps I misunderstand, Andrew?
Any objectors, say so now or I will commit tomorrow.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2014-11-19 11:36:59 | Re: tracking commit timestamps |
| Previous Message | Albe Laurenz | 2014-11-19 11:26:56 | Unlogged tables can vanish after a crash |