From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |
Date: | 2011-12-17 21:25:02 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRAHvdY1GymFji_WY0wZk=1vFj5bqAy-_h5JHnWS27kenQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello
>
> You have the option "fatal_errors" for the checker function, but you
> special case it in CheckFunction(CheckFunctionStmt *stmt) and turn
> errors to warnings if it is not set.
>
> Wouldn't it be better to have the checker function ereport a WARNING
> or an ERROR depending on the setting? Options should be handled by the
> checker function.
>
A would to process fatal_errors out of checker function - just it is
more robust. This flag has not too sense in plpgsql - but can have a
more sense in other languages.
But I'll think again about flags
note about warnings and errors. Warnings are useless on checker
function level, because they are just shown, but they cannot be
trapped.
maybe result based on tuplestore can be better - I have to look on it.
Regards
Pavel
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2011-12-17 21:33:24 | Page Checksums |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-12-17 21:00:56 | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |