public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Pavel Stehule <[email protected]>
To: Dmitry Dolgov <[email protected]>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: DUVAL REMI <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: proposal: schema variables
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 05:07:09 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFj8pRDDTfQdE9kZjRvLSAVtd1jfEKFoUG+U9XQEFjhM4yz9EA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAFj8pRC+hPCc2X88xC=pTJoqmVPApDsageZOMyqaxi5788WxHA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFj8pRDJ9cq00VYSHxs6LsoHNWjhYXyWWBtV6UgeWwhs0AHa9A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFj8pRBPXTcw_3fpKtgVthV2+9rZGhxitZ40DnAwCrK601TZZg@mail.gmail.com>
<ndtfl4tsnpkb7m7hwvnmlpsascpgd3a7xvjmjhtxffsbrgygtm@4du6zsmnnwq5>
<CAFj8pRAu4XvNCGu1751t=2YEqLqTjDA3FavMExm2S0KYQq=DdQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFj8pRAsEoeZv0HEnA8CKgFKDSQ-wYw18Os1vdksWCV7ez2bVw@mail.gmail.com>
<3chredgnjcmccym2kczawfih226b4ac6co7p6z4jeofevrcosi@mrsxkx2x2c65>
<CAFj8pRBoWPDTOwn5FmMzc+1qiopw+N04U26nviOdF61fs8A2wQ@mail.gmail.com>
<stckyvkl4yyzvgjsaawojs3xikke7mmds5bhv7l7qerclywywk@h4v4n43xm6u2>
<CAFj8pRB_E1GM_YGT-ti4bXka6mhLdAAFeTe+BHgHFYC+qb-76g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
st 20. 11. 2024 v 21:14 odesÃlatel Dmitry Dolgov <[email protected]>
napsal:
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 08:14:01PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I wrote POC of VARIABLE(varname) syntax support
>
> Thanks, the results look good. I'm still opposed the idea of having a
> warning, and think it has to be an error -- but it's my subjective
> opinion. Lets see if there are more votes on that topic.
>
The error breaks the possibility to use variables (session variables) like
Oracle's package variables easily. It increases effort for transformation
or porting because you should identify variables inside queries and you
should wrap it to fence. On the other hand, extensions that can read a
query after transformation can easily detect unwrapped variables and they
can raise an error. It can be very easy to implement this check to
plpgsql_check for example or like plpgsql.extra_check.
In my ideal world, the shadowing warning should be enabled by default, and
an unfencing warning disabled by default. But I have not a problem with
activating both warnings by default. I think warnings are enough, because
if there is some risk then a shadowing warning is activated. And my
experience is more positive about warnings, people read it.
Regards
Pavel
view thread (439+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: proposal: schema variables
In-Reply-To: <CAFj8pRDDTfQdE9kZjRvLSAVtd1jfEKFoUG+U9XQEFjhM4yz9EA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox