On 09/01/2014 12:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2014-09-01 12:49:22 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: >> On 9/1/14 12:12 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> On 2014-09-01 12:00:48 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: >>>> On 9/1/14 11:53 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote: >>>>>> You're going to have to find a more gradual way of doing this. >>>>> Probably a better way (and there has been some talk of it) is >>>>> having some kind of PRAGMA functionality, or pl/pgsql specific >>>>> LOCAL SET to affect "just this function" and not spill to nested >>>>> functions as is the case for SETs now. >>>> I can't imagine how that would work for anyone who has thousands of >>>> functions. >>> How's that fundamentally different from changing languages? If we had a >>> way to *add* such attributes to *existing* functions I don't see the >>> fundamental problem? >> Adding 5-10 of these for every function you create seems significantly more >> painful than saying "this function uses plpgsql2". You could package up these 5-10 SET LOCAL options as a separate language handler (called plpgsql2) which really does nothing more than set the local options and call the base handler :)
this will still leave you with flexibility of adding/removing features for single functions For extra convenience you could even create a "CREATE META LANGUAGE ..." option for defining such language handlers. >> Though perhaps what's >> being suggested is a *single* option which changes everything at once? Then >> there wouldn't be a huge difference. > The likelihood of us now knowing all the things that we want to break > rigth now seems about zero. There *will* be further ones. If we go with > the approach of creating new language versions for all of them we'll end > up with a completely unmaintainable mess. For PG devs, application dev > and DBAs. > > Since what you seemingly want - sensibly so imo - is to set the default > errors for *new* functions, but leave the old set of errors for > preexisting ones, I suggest adding a GUC that defines the set of > warnings/errors *new* functions get. There'd need to be some syntax to > opt out for pg_dump and similar, but that sounds unproblematic. > > One question here imo is whether we design something for plpgsql or more > generic... I for one would like to have a generic "SET LOCAL" feature so it could also be used for pl/pythonu or pl/v8 Cheers -- Hannu Krosing PostgreSQL Consultant Performance, Scalability and High Availability 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
