Thread: pl/pgSQL doco patch
Hi, I supplied a minor doco patch relating to porting pl/SQL to pl/pgSQL: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01295.php. Also attached here. Could someone please review and apply this for me? Regards, Philip. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan ----------------- Utiba Pty Ltd This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is believed to be clean.
Attachment
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Yarra wrote:
> Hi, I supplied a minor doco patch relating to porting pl/SQL to pl/pgSQL:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01295.php. Also
> attached here.
>
> Could someone please review and apply this for me?
>
> Regards, Philip.
>
> --
>
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
> Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
> by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
>
> -----------------
> Utiba Pty Ltd
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is
> believed to be clean.
>
[ Attachment, skipping... ]
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:40 am, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I am wondering we should make this warning more prominent - it would be > easily missed buried on the Oracle porting section, and I have seen > people caught by it lots of times. I added it to the Oracle section because I found this syntax while porting an Oracle stored proc to a pl/pgSQL function, and assumed it was an Oracle-ism. Do other RDBMSs also allow you to qualify function_name.param_name to distinguish a param from a column of the same name? If so, sure, I'll put it somewhere more general (suggestions?), and Tom, I think that would lend weight to allowing PostgreSQL to do it too (not because it's The Right Thing, but for interoperability and ease of porting). Thoughts? Regards, Philip. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan ----------------- Utiba Pty Ltd This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is believed to be clean.
I am wondering we should make this warning more prominent - it would be easily missed buried on the Oracle porting section, and I have seen people caught by it lots of times. cheers andrew Philip Yarra wrote: >Hi, I supplied a minor doco patch relating to porting pl/SQL to pl/pgSQL: >http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01295.php. Also >attached here. > >Could someone please review and apply this for me? > >Regards, Philip. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Index: doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml >=================================================================== >RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml,v >retrieving revision 1.79 >diff -c -r1.79 plpgsql.sgml >*** doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml 21 Oct 2005 05:11:23 -0000 1.79 >--- doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml 28 Oct 2005 05:20:54 -0000 >*************** >*** 3132,3137 **** >--- 3132,3144 ---- > state in temporary tables, instead. > </para> > </listitem> >+ <listitem> >+ <para> >+ You cannot use parameter names that are the same as columns >+ that are referenced in the function. Oracle does allow you to do this >+ if you qualify the parameter name as function_name.paramater_name >+ </para> >+ </listitem> > </itemizedlist> > </para> > > >
Add documentation about the inability of plpsql to use parameter names that are the same as column names used in the function. I moved the item up on the list of porting issues. Patch applied to CVS HEAD and 8.1.X. Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Philip Yarra wrote: > Hi, I supplied a minor doco patch relating to porting pl/SQL to pl/pgSQL: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01295.php. Also > attached here. > > Could someone please review and apply this for me? > > Regards, Philip. > > -- > > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan > > ----------------- > Utiba Pty Ltd > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is > believed to be clean. > [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
I think the Oracle porting section is the correct place for this item. Thanks for the patch. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Philip Yarra wrote: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:40 am, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > I am wondering we should make this warning more prominent - it would be > > easily missed buried on the Oracle porting section, and I have seen > > people caught by it lots of times. > > I added it to the Oracle section because I found this syntax while porting an > Oracle stored proc to a pl/pgSQL function, and assumed it was an Oracle-ism. > > Do other RDBMSs also allow you to qualify function_name.param_name to > distinguish a param from a column of the same name? If so, sure, I'll put it > somewhere more general (suggestions?), and Tom, I think that would lend > weight to allowing PostgreSQL to do it too (not because it's The Right Thing, > but for interoperability and ease of porting). Thoughts? > > Regards, Philip. > > -- > > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan > > ----------------- > Utiba Pty Ltd > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is > believed to be clean. > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073