2008/5/12 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > "Brendan Jurd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I agree that the % formatting in the RAISE message is weird, but it is >> useful. > > Sure, I'm not proposing removing it. > >> What would we do if the user specifies a %-formatted message as well >> as a MESSAGE option? > > Throw an error (just like if they specified the same option type twice). > >> I like "RAISE condition_name", can we support it in conjunction with >> the current syntax? That is: > >> RAISE level [condition] [string literal, [parameter, ...]] [USING >> [option = value, ...]] > > Well, it's sort of a mess because level has to become optional in order > to be Oracle-compatible (or PSM-compliant, if Kevin is correct). We > could get away with it only if the condition were not allowed to be > a string literal, which I guess is tolerable but it's a bit annoying. > It would get less annoying if we allowed user-declared exception names. > I find the Oracle syntax for those to be spectacularly awful: > > DECLARE > deadlock_detected EXCEPTION; > PRAGMA EXCEPTION_INIT(deadlock_detected, -60); > > but it sounds like SQL/PSM's syntax isn't so bad. I could live with > the reported > > DECLARE > condition-name CONDITION FOR SQLSTATE VALUE character-literal > > However, that's a separate feature and I don't want to get into it as > part of the current patch. > > regards, tom lane >
Tom, it's exactly like my patch that you rejected two years ago. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-07/msg00176.php Pavel -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
