On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:14:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> Better to enhance this feature step by step.
> > Agreed -- IMO this is a reasonable first step, except that I would
> > rename the proposed extension so that it doesn't focus solely on
> > the first step.
> Quite.  The patch fails to make up its mind whether it's a trivial
> example meant as a coding demonstration, or something that's going
> to become actually useful.
> In the category of "actually useful", I would put checks like "are
> there unqualified outer references in subqueries".  That's something
> we see complaints about at least once a month, I think, and it's the
> type of error that even seasoned SQL authors can make easily.  But
> the current patch is not extensible in that direction (checking for
> this in post_parse_analyze_hook seems quite impractical).
> Also, somebody who wants a check like that isn't necessarily going
> to want "no WHERE clause" training wheels.  So you're going to need
> to think about facilities to enable or disable different checks.

This is just the discussion I'd hoped for.  I'll draft up a patch in
the next day or two, reflecting what's gone so far.

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to