| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: plpgsql.warn_shadow |
| Date: | 2014-01-17 10:45:24 |
| Message-ID: | 52D909C4.2000901@joh.to |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/17/14 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> After some thinking I don't think so this design is not good. It changing
> a working with exception (error) levels - and it is not consistent with
> other PostgreSQL parts.
>
> A benefit is less than not clean configuration. Better to solve similar
> issues via specialized plpgsql extensions or try to help me push
> plpgsql_check_function to core. It can be a best holder for this and
> similar checks.
I see these as being two are different things. There *is* a need for a
full-blown static analyzer for PL/PgSQL, but I don't think it needs to
be in core. However, there seems to be a number of pitfalls we could
warn the user about with little effort in core, and I think those are
worth doing.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2014-01-17 11:05:08 | Re: GIN improvements part 1: additional information |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-01-17 10:26:25 | Re: plpgsql.warn_shadow |