Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement
Date: 2019-01-04 13:17:49
Message-ID: CAFj8pRBu+NeKRaM9M4kLkfx4yRDX0UmUdW0dL0pseV8vP_6xgA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

pá 4. 1. 2019 v 14:07 odesílatel Peter Eisentraut <
peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> napsal:

> On 06/12/2018 18:27, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > For my purpose I can imagine PRAGMA on function level with same syntax
> > like PL/SQL - I need to push somewhere some information that I can use
> > for plpgsql_check to protect users against false alarms. The locality in
> > this moment is not too important for me. But I prefer solution that
> > doesn't looks too strange, and is possible just with change plpgsql
> parser.
>
> When you are about to warn about a particular statement, you have the
> statement's line number, so you can look up the source code and check
> for any disable-this-warning comments.
>

It means to write own lexer and preparse source code before I start
checking.

I think so block level PRAGMA is significantly better solution

> --
> Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrey Borodin 2019-01-04 13:26:18 Re: GiST VACUUM
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-01-04 13:07:37 Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement