From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement |
Date: | 2018-12-07 20:28:09 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYkR=NvixYwU32c2zWUjgXSu4vNXCafpLqG=ydLC4kC8Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:28 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> please, can you propose, some what you like?
>
> For my purpose I can imagine PRAGMA on function level with same syntax like PL/SQL - I need to push somewhere some information that I can use for plpgsql_check to protect users against false alarms. The locality in this moment is not too important for me. But I prefer solution that doesn't looks too strange, and is possible just with change plpgsql parser.
Well, I haven't really studied this, but I would assume a
statement-level pragma would look like an annotation of some kind on
that particular statement, e.g.
PRAGMA plpgsql_check (magic pavel stuff goes here) SELECT ...
Rather than a separate statement:
PRAGMA plpgsql_check (magic pavel stuff goes here);
SELECT ...
This might be the wrong idea, I'm not an expert on this or anything.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-12-07 20:32:32 | Re: rewrite ExecPartitionCheckEmitError |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-12-07 20:24:32 | Re: slow queries over information schema.tables |