Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement

čt 7. 3. 2019 v 18:45 odesílatel Andrew Dunstan <
andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> napsal:

>
> On 3/7/19 12:41 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >
> >
> > čt 7. 3. 2019 v 18:35 odesílatel Andrew Dunstan
> > <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
> > <mailto:andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>> napsal:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The other thing that bugs me a bit about the patch is that the only
> > testing it does it to make sure that pragmas are ignored by the core
> > plpgsql processor. Maybe that's enough, but mostly we tend to like to
> > have one actual use of a feature.
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately plpgsql_check is not part of upstream
> >
> > https://github.com/okbob/plpgsql_check
> >
> > I can to write some simple extension - some print tracing, that can
> > use this feature?
> >
> >
>
> Works for me. Another idea I had was some sort of crypto signature pragma.
>
>
> I still think making it block level only is unwarranted, though.
>

for me it is better than nothing, and it is good - it is not bad
compromise. It can be enhanced in future, when there will be good case. I
didn't propose any syntax, feature, that block future full implementation
compatible with Ada and PL/SQL.

Pavel

>
> cheers
>
>
> andrew
>
>
> --
> Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>
>