On 10/22/15 4:59 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
It prevents everyone from reinventing the 'create a function wrapper around RAISE' wheel that several people on this list alone have admitted to. I think there's plenty of value in that.I have different opinion, I am sorry. The RAISE statement is differently designed with different possibility - the function is limited by using variadic function, and should not to have same behave as RAISE. And I don't like a idea to push RAISE to behave of variadic function.
I thought the only issue here was that RAISE currently pukes on a NULL input, and I thought you'd changed your mind and agreed that it makes sense for RAISE to just silently ignore anything that's NULL (except maybe for message). Am I wrong on one or both counts?
IIRC 3 or 4 people on this list liked the idea of a function roughly equivalent to RAISE, to avoid the make-work of writing that function. That's why I disagree with your statement that there's no point to this function even if it acts the same as RAISE.
-- 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
