Re: 2024-02-08 release announcement draft

From: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 2024-02-08 release announcement draft
Date: 2024-02-08 12:34:56
Message-ID: CACJufxGafAPL-ecJBHK5SSZ6SjLSzL8b7LimbZJoSAg=5ySGkA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 1:17 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > On 2/6/24 3:19 AM, jian he wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 12:43 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> >>> * In PL/pgSQL, support SQL commands that are `CREATE FUNCTION`/`CREATE
> >>> PROCEDURE` with SQL-standard bodies.
>
> >> https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=57b440ec115f57ff6e6a3f0df26063822e3123d2
> >> says only for plpgsql routine or DO block.
>
> > I had some trouble wordsmithing this, but the commit title is pretty
> > clear to me so I opted for that.
>
> Your text seems fine to me. I'm confused about the objection here:
> exactly what uses of plpgsql aren't in a routine or DO block?
>
> regards, tom lane

I guess I was confused with cases like this
`
create function test1() returns int language plpgsql
begin atomic
select unique1 from tenk1 limit 1;
end ;
`
looking back, the original text seems fine.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2024-02-08 12:57:47 Re: "ERROR: latch already owned" on gharial
Previous Message jian he 2024-02-08 12:17:09 Re: Catalog domain not-null constraints