Re: PL/pgSQL 2

From: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL 2
Date: 2014-09-02 07:44:01
Message-ID: CAASwCXfKY7bMRodCXyHEo3xuBpNpfPxTM3cy+ZewYiM2URgf-Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
> On 09/02/2014 09:06 AM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> For me, the most important is to not break *most* of existing plpgsql
>> code, but it's OK to break *some*.
>> And when breaking it, it should be trivial to rewrite it to become
>> compatible.
>
>
> I think the next step would be to list all the things you don't like with
> current PL/pgSQL, and write down how you would want them to work if you were
> starting with a clean slate. Let's see how wide the consensus is that the
> new syntax/behavior is better than what we have now. We can then start
> thinking how to best adapt them to the current PL/pgSQL syntax and codebase.
> Maybe with pragmas, or new commands, or deprecating the old behavior; the
> best approach depends on the details, and how widely desired the new
> behavior is, so we need to see that first.
>
> I'd suggest collecting the ideas on a wiki page, and once you have some
> concrete set of features and syntax there, start a new thread to discuss
> them. Others will probably have other features they want, like the simpler
> "DROP TABLE ?" thing.

Excellent idea, I'm on it!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2014-09-02 08:04:48 Re: How about a proper TEMPORARY TABLESPACE?
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2014-09-02 07:26:09 Re: ALTER SYSTEM RESET?