Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
Cc: "Tom Lane *EXTERN*" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
Date: 2011-12-08 15:34:10
Message-ID: CAFj8pRCkfGwVXcTPhWjTEYUtGtxGkv9wvheF7aXWL1HijZv0+w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello

a small addition

* don't check SQL functions - are checked well now
* don't check functions from information_schema too

Regards

Pavel

2011/12/8 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> Hello
>
> updated version
>
> changes:
>
> * CHECK FUNCTION ALL; is enabled - in this case functions from
> pg_catalog schema are ignored
>
> I looked on parser, and I didn't other changes there - IN SCHEMA, FOR
> ROLE are used more time there, so our usage will be consistent
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
> 2011/12/7 Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>:
>> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>> The syntax error messages are still inadequate; all I can get is
>>>> 'syntax error at or near "%s"'.  They should be more detailed.
>>>
>>> this system is based on error messages that generates a plpgsql engine
>>> or bison engine. I can correct only a few percent from these messages
>>> :(
>>>
>>> internally I didn't wrote a compiler or plpgsql checker - this is just
>>> tool that can emit some plpgsql interpret subprocess - and when these
>>> subprocesses raises exceptions, then takes their messages.
>>
>> I see.
>>
>>>> I think that at least the documentation should be improved before
>>>> I am ready to set this as "ready for committer".
>>>
>>> please, can you send a correction to documentation or error messages?
>>>
>>> I am not able to write documentation
>>
>> I'll give it a try.
>>
>> Yours,
>> Laurenz Albe

Attachment Content-Type Size
check_function-2011-12-08-2.diff text/x-patch 97.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-12-08 15:35:05 Re: Lots of FSM-related fragility in transaction commit
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2011-12-08 14:07:07 Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement