Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRBV8zO3XF=hxnHHNB80cVHJXU63Z__19p2JaqeLWws-5w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


2015-10-18 21:13 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>:
On 10/17/15 11:49 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-10-17 18:42 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com
<mailto:Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>>:

    On 10/15/15 11:51 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:

        I don't think so ignoring NULL in RAISE statement is good idea
        (it is
        not safe). We can replace NULL by some string (like "NULL") by
        default.
        I am thinking about other possibilities.


    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.
 

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.

Regards

Pavel
 

--
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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kouhei Kaigai
Date:
Subject: Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual
Next
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual