Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Actually, the reason I didn't do something about RAISE in 8.0 was that >> I thought we should reconsider the whole design of the statement
> The ensuing discussion on this sounds good to me; should I apply Pavel's > RAISE patch now, or wait for the subsequent work on specifying a > particular SQLSTATE? The patch seems to me to be OK as far as it goes. I brought up the other points only because I wanted to be sure that it wouldn't be inconsistent with the next step; but it seems we're pretty well agreed that we aren't going to do anything that would break this. So I have no problem with applying as-is, rather than waiting for an all-inclusive patch. But you had mentioned wanting to look at reducing overhead by using exec_eval_expr(); were you intending to do that before committing? As far as the subsequent discussion itself goes, Pavel and I seem to be pretty unsuccessful at convincing each other of our respective visions of what an exception ought to be. Any opinions? Should we be taking this thread to -hackers for a wider audience? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]