On 10/15/15 11:51 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I don't think so ignoring NULL in RAISE statement is good idea (it is not safe). We can replace NULL by some string (like "NULL") by default. I am thinking about other possibilities.
What I was trying to say is that if the argument to a USING option is NULL then RAISE should skip over it, as if it hadn't been applied at all. Similar to how the code currently tests for \0.
1. some RAISE statement flag - but there was strong disagreement when I did it last time 2. some plpgsql GUC variables like plpgsq.raise_ignore_null 3. accept a function from this patch Now, I am thinking so @3 is good option. It can be really useful as last rescue for other PL without possibility to raise rich PostgreSQL exception - currently PLPythonu, partially PLPerl (where are more issues), probably in others.
I agree, assuming the patch exposes all the stuff you can do with USING in plpgsql.
-- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
