On 9/3/14 5:05 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 07:54:09AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I am not against to improve a PL/pgSQL. And I repeat, what can be done and can
be done early:
a) ASSERT clause -- with some other modification to allow better static analyze
of DML statements, and enforces checks in runtime.
b) #option or PRAGMA clause with GUC with function scope that enforce check on
processed rows after any DML statement
c) maybe introduction automatic variable ROW_COUNT as shortcut for GET
DIAGNOSTICS rc = ROW_COUNT
All these ideas are being captured somewhere, right? Where?
I'm working on a wiki page with all these ideas. Some of them break
backwards compatibility somewhat blatantly, some of them could be added
into PL/PgSQL if we're okay with reserving a keyword for the feature.
All of them we think are necessary.
.marko
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
