"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > who write this patch?
Well, like I said, I'm willing to adjust the patch to whatever syntax we come up with. After sleeping on it I'm a bit less excited about using the SQL/PSM SIGNAL syntax; the reason being that if we use that, and then sometime in the future we read the spec more closely and find out that it demands different behavior than RAISE has, we'd have a compatibility problem. Inventing PG-only additions to RAISE doesn't carry that risk. So right now I'm thinking I like my original proposal http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00357.php with the exception that we should go with SQLSTATE 'xyzzy' as the syntax in EXCEPTION lists. Also I'm willing to go with ERRCODE rather than CODE as the name of the USING option, since Pavel didn't like CODE. (I don't want to use SQLSTATE for it, because with this syntax it's pretty clear that SQLSTATE means one of the 5-letter codes, *not* a condition name.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
