Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-12-17T21:25:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add const qualifiers to node inspection functions
- d5f23af6bfbc 9.2.0 cited
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