Review of Writeable CTE Patch
in [PgSql]
|
From: Robert Haas on 3 Feb 2010 09:09 On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja(a)cs.helsinki.fi> wrote: > Hi, > > On 2010-02-03 11:04 UTC+2, Takahiro Itagaki wrote: >> Hi, I'm reviewing the writable CTE patch. The code logic seems to be >> pretty good, but I have a couple of comments about error cases: >> >> * Did we have a consensus about user-visible "DML WITH" messages? >> The term is used in error messages in many places, for example: >> "DML WITH without RETURNING is only allowed inside an unreferenced CTE" >> Since we don't use "DML WITH" nor "CTE" in documentation, >> I'd like to avoid such technical acronyms in logs if we had better names, >> or we should have a section to explain them in docs. > > We have yet to reach a consensus on the name for this feature. I don't > think we have any really good candidates, but I like "DML WITH" best so far. Why can't we complain about the actual SQL statement the user issued? Like, say: INSERT requires RETURNING when used within a referenced CTE ....Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |