Re: patch: CHECK FUNCTION statement - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thom Brown
Subject Re: patch: CHECK FUNCTION statement
Date
Msg-id CAA-aLv7rwBe0xeXVTna6kDpWf=PkQjtXQZUPz-Hzk-Kc0QCZPw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to patch: CHECK FUNCTION statement  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: patch: CHECK FUNCTION statement
List pgsql-hackers
On 6 October 2011 12:52, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I am sending a version with regress tests and basic documentation

Hi Pavel,

I think this sentence needs rewriting:

"checkfunction is the name of a previously registered function that
will be called when a new function in the language is created, to
check the function by statemnt CHECK FUNCTION or CHECK TRIGGER."

to something like:

"checkfunction is the name of an existing function that will be called
whenever a CHECK FUNCTION or CHECK TRIGGER is requested on a function
written in the language."

And shouldn't this apply to ALTER LANGUAGE too?

And there seem to be copy/paste symptoms in
doc/src/sgml/ref/check_function.sgml where it shows the definition of
CREATE FUNCTION and CREATE TRIGGER instead of CHECK FUNCTION and CHECK
TRIGGER.

In src/include/nodes/parsenodes.h there's the error message "there are
no plan for query:".  This should probably read "there is no plan for
query:".  This appears more than once.

And "cannot to identify real type for record type variable" doesn't
sound right.  Firstly "to" shouldn't be in there, and referring to a
"real" type is ambiguous as there is a data type called "real".  This
appears at least twice.

In src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c:

"cannot to determine a result of dynamic SQL" should be "cannot
determine result of dynamic SQL".

Also, I recommend rebasing this patch as it doesn't apply cleanly.  In
particular, the following fail:

src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_funcs.c
src/test/regress/expected/plpgsql.out
src/test/regress/sql/plpgsql.sql

I haven't tried actually testing the patch itsel, but I will probably
give it a go if a rebased version appears. :)

--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Concurrent CREATE TABLE/DROP SCHEMA leaves inconsistent leftovers
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Concurrent CREATE TABLE/DROP SCHEMA leaves inconsistent leftovers