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 |
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 |