Re: PL/pgSQL bug?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL bug?
Date: 2001-08-10 14:06:54
Message-ID: 12398.997452414@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> If that's the case, it must be a general problem with SPI
> that'll apply to any procedural language as well as user
> defined C function using SPI.

Not necessarily. It looks to me like someone is forgetting to do a
CommandCounterIncrement() between plpgsql statements. Is this something
that plpgsql should do, or should SPI do it? Not clear.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-08-10 14:07:43 Re: Revised Patch to allow multiple table locks in "Unison"
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-08-10 13:54:46 Re: PL/pgSQL bug?