On 2015-09-09 23:45:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Were all twenty of them exactly alike? Were they identical to Andres' > several dozen attempts?
Mine were pretty much alike and trivial - which is why I never even bothered to standardize on a variant and store it somewhere. > The problem I've got with this proposal is that by the time you get to > a function that could satisfy every possible use-case, you do not have > something that is easier to use than "write your own function that > addresses just your use-case". That's a valid concern. I think the answer there is that we shouldn't design something usable for every use-case, but rather for 90% of the cases. Which is a tradeof we very frequently make. > The only complaint I've seen in this thread that seems like a valid > deficiency is that RAISE can't deal with treating the error severity level > as a variable. But surely we should address that as a new RAISE feature, > not by inventing a SQL wrapper that will need to reproduce every existing > RAISE feature before it can think about solving anything new. That seems like something independently useful. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
