Hello 2012/3/7 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Just to be clear, I am not proposing that we get rid of CHECK TRIGGER >> and keep CHECK FUNCTION. I'm proposing that we get rid of all of the >> dedicated syntax support, and expose it all through one or more >> SQL-callable functions. > > This seems entirely reasonable to me. The syntax support is not the > value-add in this patch, and it's been clear since day one that it would > be difficult for the syntax to cover all the likely permutations of > "which functions do you want to check?". A function-based interface > seems like both less work and more functionality. Yes, it's marginally > less convenient for simple cases, but I'm not even sure that we know > which "simple cases" are going to be popular. We can and should > postpone that decision until we have some field experience to base it on. > >> If we need both >> plpgsql_check_function(procoid) and plpgsql_check_trigger(tgoid), no >> problem. > > FWIW, I would suggest check_trigger(regclass, name) not tgoid, because > we do not have a regtrigger convenience type (and I don't think it's > worth adding one). > > More importantly, I do not agree with requiring the user to specify the > language name --- that is, it should be check_function(procoid) and have > that look up a language-specific checker. Otherwise, scenarios like > "check all my functions regardless of language" are too painful. > There is value-added in providing that much infrastructure.
here is updated patch (with regress tests, with documentation).
I removed a CHECK FUNCTION and CHECK TRIGGER statements and replaced
it by pg_check_function and pg_check_trigger like Tom proposed.
The core of this patch is same - plpgsql checker, only user interface
was reduced.
postgres=> select pg_check_function('f2()');
pg_check_function
---------------------------------------------------------------
error:42703:3:RETURN:column "missing_variable" does not exist
Query: SELECT 'Hello' || missing_variable
-- ^
(3 rows)
postgres=> select pg_check_trigger('t','t1');
pg_check_trigger
--------------------------------------------------------
error:42703:3:assignment:record "new" has no field "b"
Context: SQL statement "SELECT new.b + 1"
(2 rows)
Regards
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
reduced_pl_checker_2012-03-08_1.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
