Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql - additional extra checks

On 07/03/2018 03:45 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 03/20/2018 01:35 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/20/2018 05:36 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 2018-03-19 21:47 GMT+01:00 Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com
>>> <mailto:tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>>:
>>>
>>>      Hi,
>>>
>>>      I'm looking at the updated patch
>>> (plpgsql-extra-check-180316.patch), and
>>>      this time it applies and builds OK. The one thing I noticed is
>>> that the
>>>      documentation still uses the old wording for
>>> strict_multi_assignement:
>>>
>>>      WARNING:  Number of evaluated fields does not match expected.
>>>      HINT:  strict_multi_assignement check of extra_warnings is active.
>>>      WARNING:  Number of evaluated fields does not match expected.
>>>      HINT:  strict_multi_assignement check of extra_warnings is active.
>>>
>>>      This was reworded to "Number of source and target fields in
>>> assignment
>>>      does not match."
>>>
>>>
>>> fixed
>>>
>>
>> OK, thanks. PFA I've marked it as ready for committer.
>>
> 
> Stephen, what are your thoughts about this patch? I remember discussing
> it with you at pgcon, but I don't recall what exactly your complaints
> were. Do you see any problems with the current version of the patch?
> 

(tumbleweed)

This is marked as RFC for quite a bit of time now. Barring objections, I
plan to commit sometime this later this week, after going through the
patch once more just to be sure.

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services