| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: catch warnings |
| Date: | 2007-01-07 16:42:34 |
| Message-ID: | 13026.1168188154@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
> PostgreSQL allow only catch exception (elevel ERROR). SQL/PSM requires that
> warnings are catchable too.
What in the world does it mean to "catch" a warning? If your intention
is to process arbitrary user-defined code while inside the error
subsystem, I can tell you right now that it's unlikely to work.
> Simply solution's is adding one callback to
> error's processing of errors on level WARNING.
I can't get excited about hooks that are defined in such a way that
there can be only one user of the hook ... if it's useful to you,
it's probably useful to someone else too.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-07 16:47:30 | Re: security definer default for some PL languages (SQL/PSM)? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-07 16:35:06 | Re: [HACKERS] SGML index build fix |