2014-11-19 17:13 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: > > On 11/19/2014 06:35 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > >> I seem to share the same opinion with Andrew: its not going to hurt to > >> include this, but its not gonna cause dancing in the streets either. I > >> would characterize that as 2 very neutral and unimpressed people, plus > >> 3 in favour. Which seems enough to commit. > > > That's about right, although I would put it a bit stronger than that. > > But if we're the only people unimpressed I'm not going to object further. > > FWIW, I would vote against it also. I do not find this to be a natural > extension of RAISE; it adds all sorts of semantic issues. (In particular, > what is the evaluation order of the WHEN versus the other subexpressions > of the RAISE?) >
last query looks clean for me. First we evaluate WHEN expression, next (if previous expression is true) we evaluate a expressions inside RAISE statement. Regards Pavel > > regards, tom lane >
