From: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: User's exception plpgsql |
Date: | 2005-07-08 04:53:14 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0507080639400.1715-100000@kix.fsv.cvut.cz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> > BTW, do have we reached a consensus on this?
>
> Doesn't look that way --- I tend to agree with you that we could avoid
> inventing declared exceptions at all, but Pavel is definitely not happy
> with it, and AFAIR no one else has weighed in. Maybe we need to take
> the discussion back to pghackers to draw a wider audience.
>
I am not happy (this is only half of step), but I don't expect better
discussion. My opinion is so exception variable has more possibilities,
but this solution is usefull and funkcional too. And we can introduce
exception variables later without problems if will be good time.
Discussion on pghackers was, but not too much people contributed. And
more, I don't see user's exception as big qustion this days.
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2005-07-08 04:54:23 | Re: User's exception plpgsql |
Previous Message | James William Pye | 2005-07-08 04:50:23 | Re: process crash when a plpython function returns |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2005-07-08 04:54:23 | Re: User's exception plpgsql |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-07-08 04:49:58 | Re: User's exception plpgsql |