| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement |
| Date: | 2019-01-04 13:17:49 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRBu+NeKRaM9M4kLkfx4yRDX0UmUdW0dL0pseV8vP_6xgA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
pá 4. 1. 2019 v 14:07 odesílatel Peter Eisentraut <
peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> napsal:
> On 06/12/2018 18:27, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > 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.
>
> When you are about to warn about a particular statement, you have the
> statement's line number, so you can look up the source code and check
> for any disable-this-warning comments.
>
It means to write own lexer and preparse source code before I start
checking.
I think so block level PRAGMA is significantly better solution
> --
> Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrey Borodin | 2019-01-04 13:26:18 | Re: GiST VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-01-04 13:07:37 | Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement |