On 1/15/14 2:27 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014/1/15 Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to>
Yeah, me neither, it's just something that needs to be communicated very
clearly. So probably just a list plpgsql.warnings would be the most
appropriate then.
I am thinking so the name is not good. Changing handling warnings is messy
- minimally in Postgres, where warnings and errors are different creatures.
what about
plpgsql.enhanced_checks = (none | warning | error)
You crammed several suggestions into one here:
1) You're advocating the ability to turn warnings into errors. This
has been met with some resistance. I think it's a useful feature, but I
would be happy with just having warnings available.
2) This syntax doesn't allow the user to specify a list of warnings
to enable. Which might be fine, I guess. I imagine the normal approach
would be to turn all warnings on anyway, and possibly fine-tune with
per-function directives if some functions do dangerous things on purpose.
3) You want to change the name to "enhanced_checks". I still think
the main feature is about displaying warnings to the user. I don't
particularly like this suggestion.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
