Re: possible proposal plpgsql GET DIAGNOSTICS oid = PG_ROUTINE_OID

From: Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: possible proposal plpgsql GET DIAGNOSTICS oid = PG_ROUTINE_OID
Date: 2023-03-26 21:37:36
Message-ID: CACLU5mRkaePuCMqiFVKg54jTn1PjT-mCnj-2zvUaKA3sHr0MCg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 10:56 AM Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 3:08 AM Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> hi
>>
>> st 8. 2. 2023 v 7:33 odesílatel Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> napsal:
>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 08:48:22PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>> >
>>> > GET DIAGNOSTICS _oid = PG_ROUTINE_OID;
>>> > RAISE NOTICE '... % ... %', _oid, _oid::regproc::text;
>>> >
>>> > Do you think it can be useful feature?
>>>
>>> +1, it would have been quite handy in a few of my projects.
>>>
>>
>> it can looks like that
>>
>> create or replace function foo(a int)
>> returns int as $$
>> declare s text; n text; o oid;
>> begin
>> get diagnostics s = pg_current_routine_signature,
>> n = pg_current_routine_name,
>> o = pg_current_routine_oid;
>> raise notice 'sign:%, name:%, oid:%', s, n, o;
>> return a;
>> end;
>> $$ language plpgsql;
>> CREATE FUNCTION
>> (2023-02-08 09:04:03) postgres=# select foo(10);
>> NOTICE: sign:foo(integer), name:foo, oid:16392
>> ┌─────┐
>> │ foo │
>> ╞═════╡
>> │ 10 │
>> └─────┘
>> (1 row)
>>
>> The name - pg_routine_oid can be confusing, because there is not clean if
>> it is oid of currently executed routine or routine from top of exception
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Pavel
>>
>
> I agree that the name changed to pg_current_routine_... makes the most
> sense, great call...
>
> +1
>

Okay, I reviewed this. I tested it (allocating too small of
varchar's for values, various "signature types"),
and also a performance test... Wow, on my VM, 10,000 Calls in a loop was
2-4ms...

The names are clear. Again, I tested with various options, and including
ROW_COUNT, or not.

This functions PERFECTLY.... Except there are no documentation changes.
Because of that, I set it to Waiting on Author.
Which might be unfair, because I could take a stab at doing the
documentation (but docs are not compiling on my setup yet).

The documentation changes are simple enough.
If I can get the docs compiled on my rig, I will see if I can make the
changes, and post an updated patch,
that contains both...

But I don't want to be stepping on toes, or having it look like I am taking
credit.

Regards - Kirk

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2023-03-26 21:40:20 Re: Time to move pg_test_timing to measure in nanoseconds
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-03-26 21:28:30 Re: meson/msys2 fails with plperl/Strawberry