Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2

From: Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>
To: Oskari Saarenmaa <os(at)ohmu(dot)fi>, Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2
Date: 2014-09-06 17:41:11
Message-ID: 540B4737.4080108@joh.to
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-09-06 7:34 PM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
> Anyway, I think the discussed feature to make select, update and delete
> throw an error if they returned or modified <> 1 row would be more
> useful as an extension of the basic sql statements instead of a plpgsql
> (2) only feature to make it possible to use it from other languages and
> outside functions.

I can't really say I object to this, but doing it in the PL allows the
parameters to be printed as well, akin to the
plpgsql.print_strict_params setting added in 9.4. Though I wonder if
that would still be possible if PL/PgSQL peeked inside the parse tree a
bit to pull out these constraints or something *waves hands*. Or
perhaps there's a better way to attach a helpful DETAIL line to the error.

.marko

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2014-09-06 17:49:39 Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement
Previous Message Oskari Saarenmaa 2014-09-06 17:34:00 Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2