2015-10-18 21:13 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com>: > On 10/17/15 11:49 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> 2015-10-17 18:42 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com >> <mailto:jim.na...@bluetreble.com>>: >> >> 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. >> >> >> I understand, but I don't prefer this behave. The NULL is strange value >> and should be signalized. >> > > So instead of raising the message we wanted, we throw a completely > different exception? How does that make sense? >
It is partially wrong because we handle all fields same. It has sense for "message" fields, and has not sense for other fields. In this case the text "NULL" will be better. > > More to the point, if RAISE operated this way then it would be trivial to > create a fully functional plpgsql wrapper around it. I have a different opinion - better to have propossed function in core. What I know, the NULL is not use in Postgres as "ignore value", and I am thinking, it is good idea. Regards Pavel > > -- > 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 >
