On 10/22/15 4:59 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> It prevents everyone from reinventing the 'create a function wrapper
> around RAISE' wheel that several people on this list alone have
> admitted to. I think there's plenty of value in that.
>
>
> I have different opinion, I am sorry. The RAISE statement is differently
> designed with different possibility - the function is limited by using
> variadic function, and should not to have same behave as RAISE. And I
> don't like a idea to push RAISE to behave of variadic function.
I thought the only issue here was that RAISE currently pukes on a NULL
input, and I thought you'd changed your mind and agreed that it makes
sense for RAISE to just silently ignore anything that's NULL (except
maybe for message). Am I wrong on one or both counts?
IIRC 3 or 4 people on this list liked the idea of a function roughly
equivalent to RAISE, to avoid the make-work of writing that function.
That's why I disagree with your statement that there's no point to this
function even if it acts the same as RAISE.
--
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
