Re: proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport
| От | Catalin Iacob |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAHg_5gp802vtNd81tnnQCDRMoHeYYTSJ5mR8zGaOf0EVSVJvqg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > Dne 29. 1. 2016 18:09 napsal uživatel "Catalin Iacob" > <iacobcatalin@gmail.com>: >> Looking at the output above, I don't see who would rely on calling >> plpy.error with multiple arguments and getting the tuple so I'm >> actually in favor of just breaking backward compatibility. Note that >> passing multiple arguments isn't even documented. So I would just >> change debug, info, error and friends to do what raise_debug, >> raise_info, raise_error do. With a single argument behavior stays the >> same, with multiple arguments one gets more useful behavior (detail, >> hint) instead of the useless tuple. That's my preference but we can >> leave the patch with raise and leave the decision to the committer. >> > > if breaking compatibility, then raise* functions are useless, and should be > removed. Indeed. I think it's better to change the existing functions and break compatibility instead of adding the raise_ functions. But the committer will decide if that's what should be done. Since you wrote the patch with raise_* I propose you keep it that way for now and let the committer decide. I wrote the doc patch based on raise_* as well. Attached is the doc patch (made on top of your patch). I'll wait for you to combine them and switch to raising Error and then hopefully this is ready for a committer to look at.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: