Re: proposal - plpgsql - all plpgsql auto variables should be constant
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal - plpgsql - all plpgsql auto variables should be constant |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRB7CYNdtSEKCTnXOu_KREc1wh5c=7W35+nKcLsUu3L1rw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal - plpgsql - all plpgsql auto variables should be constant (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
út 28. 4. 2020 v 13:35 odesílatel Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> napsal:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 7:56 PM Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 10:08, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> > I'm skeptical. If we'd marked them that way from day one, it would have
> > been fine, but to change it now is a whole different discussion. I think
> > the odds that anybody will thank us are much smaller than the odds that
> > there will be complaints. In particular, I'd be just about certain that
> > there are people out there who are changing FOUND and loop control
> > variables manually, and they will not appreciate us breaking their code.
>
> I kind of doubt it would break anybody's code. But I also doubt it's
> actually going to help anybody. It's not exactly an easy bug to write,
> so meh, I can't really get worked up either way about this.
We could retain the old behaviour by using a GUC which defaults to old
behaviour. More GUCs means more confusion, this once guc under plpgsql
extension might actually help.
I am not sure if other GUC can help (in this case). Probably it cannot be default, and beginners has zero knowledge to enable this or similar GUC.
This week I enhanced plpgsql_check about new check https://github.com/okbob/plpgsql_check related to this feature.
I afraid so people who needs these checks and some help probably doesn't know about this extension.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: