| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2019-03 CF Summary / Review - Tranche #2 |
| Date: | 2019-02-16 06:02:50 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRBf9oGJKiTo=9AG2zj3LZ_LM-8B67NWPfc_BCis+WoDQg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
> - block level PRAGMA
>
> NR: My reading of this thread is that the proposal is closer to being
> rejected than merged.
>
> Andres: reject or punt?
>
>
This patch is very simple and has strong sense for users of
plpgsql_checks. For first moment, only plpgsql_check's users can get some
advance from it. But if we implement autonomous transactions, and I hope so
this feature will be implemented, then this code can be used for Oracle's
PL/SQL syntax compatible implementation. There is not any disadvantage - it
is clean, and compatible with ADA, PL/SQL .. I implemented just only block
level PRAGMA, and there was not any disagreement.
Regards
Pavel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-02-16 06:52:41 | Re: 2019-03 CF Summary / Review - Tranche #2 |
| Previous Message | Arseny Sher | 2019-02-16 06:02:29 | Re: Too rigorous assert in reorderbuffer.c |