2010/2/16 Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com>: > 2010/2/16 Hitoshi Harada <umi.tan...@gmail.com>: >> 2010/2/16 Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com>: >>> I think, so these problem have to be identified in compile stage - but >>> it can be too strict for all (and can slow down production) - it is >>> reason for plugin. >>> >>> What do you think about this idea? >> >> How do you identify them? Running function body cannot be applied if >> the function is volatile. Also, I don't see how do you choose function >> argument values even in immutable cases. > > It is issue only for dynamic sql and polymorphic functions. But for > all others we can do full check in validation stage. I thinking about > similar tool to lint - just for plpgsql function. It cannot detect all > bugs, but it can diagnose 99% of possible issues. > > I don't would to execute function - it is useless because you need > good UI for execution all path. My idea is different. gram.y has > check_sql_expr rutine. This is used for parser checking every static > SQL fragment in plpgsql function. With some hook we can do full plan > generation instead.
Hmm, type mismatching can be checked by your suggestion, but that's it. The true answer to your original post might be "write unit test", isn't it? Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
