Re: Why does the PL/pgSQL compiler do this?

2016-11-01 18:36 GMT+01:00 Michael Moore <michaeljmoore(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> Hi Tom,
> understood. If anybody needs a tiny bit of motivation to write that extra
> bit of code which would complain at compile time: I sense that there are a
> lot of shops like mine who would love to get off of Oracle due to the cost.
> That means you'll have guys like myself who are well versed on Oracle's
> PL/SQL trying to write PL/pgSQL functions. If ROLLBACK; were to cause a
> syntax error, it would immediately tell guys like myself that we are
> missing a key concept of how PL/pgSQL works. Saving the error until run
> time makes look for other reasons that ROLLBACK; might not be working. I
> know it's a trivial point, but just putting it out there.
>

This issue can be checked simply by plpgsql_check in next version.

Regards

Pavel

>
> Thanks everybody for the enlightening conversation!
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Michael Moore <michaeljmoore(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > I'm still a bit confused. If I replace the ROLLBACK; command with
>> ELEPHANT;
>> > the result is a syntax error. Why doesn't ROLLBACK; produce the same
>> error
>> > since it is not valid in the LANGUAGE plpgsql.
>>
>> That's a runtime error so far as plpgsql is concerned, because it relies
>> on the SPI layer to throw the error. It might be practical to complain
>> about it at compile time, but it would be some extra code that nobody's
>> written.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>
>