Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14089.1427324896@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com> writes: > On 3/25/15 1:21 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> 2015-03-25 0:17 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us >> <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>>: >>> (BTW, is considering >>> NULL to be a failure the right thing? SQL CHECK conditions consider >>> NULL to be allowed ...) >> This is a question - I am happy with SQL CHECK for data, but I am not >> sure if same behave is safe for plpgsql (procedural) assert. More >> stricter behave is safer - and some bugs in procedures are based on >> unhandled NULLs in variables. So in this topic I prefer implemented >> behave. It is some like: > +1. I think POLA here is that an assert must be true and only true to be > valid. If someone was unhappy with that they could always coalesce(..., > true). Fair enough. Committed with the other changes. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: