On 10/19/15 1:09 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> What I was trying to say is that if the argument to a USING
> option
> is NULL then RAISE should skip over it, as if it hadn't
> been applied
> at all. Similar to how the code currently tests for \0.
>
>
> I understand, but I don't prefer this behave. The NULL is
> strange value
> and should be signalized.
>
>
> So instead of raising the message we wanted, we throw a completely
> different exception? How does that make sense?
>
>
> It is partially wrong because we handle all fields same. It has sense
> for "message" fields, and has not sense for other fields. In this case
> the text "NULL" will be better.
I fail to see how doing
HINT: NULL
is much better than just not raising a HINT at all...
> More to the point, if RAISE operated this way then it would be
> trivial to create a fully functional plpgsql wrapper around it.
>
>
> I have a different opinion - better to have propossed function in core.
> What I know, the NULL is not use in Postgres as "ignore value", and I am
> thinking, it is good idea.
Normally I'd agree, but in this case I think it's inline with what the C
code is already doing by testing for \0.
I suppose if we get the function it's not that bad since at least we get
the functionality, so I'll stop arguing it.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
