Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #4516: FOUND variable does not work after RETURN QUERY

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Michal szymanski" <szymanskim(at)datera(dot)pl>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #4516: FOUND variable does not work after RETURN QUERY
Date: 2008-11-06 21:18:35
Message-ID: 162867790811061318n102285b2lf4217e25c56f98df@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-hackers
2008/11/6 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> 2008/11/6 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>>> RETURN isn't one of them.
>
>> It should be enhanced - my initial proposal of return query expected
>> so return query is last statement, that isn't now. So we could add
>> this check there.
>
> Well, changing the semantics of an already-released statement carries a
> risk of breaking existing apps that aren't expecting it to change FOUND.
> So I'd want to see a pretty strong case why this is important --- not
> just that it didn't meet someone's didn't-read-the-manual expectation.
>

It's should do some problems, but I belive much less than change of
casting or tsearch2 integration. And actually it's not ortogonal.
Every not dynamic statement change FOUND variable.

regards
Pavel Stehule


>                        regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-11-06 21:26:17
Subject: Re: [WIP] In-place upgrade
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-11-06 21:04:49
Subject: postgres buildfarm member "dugong"

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: William DavisDate: 2008-11-07 01:45:27
Subject: Fwd: postgresql83 and ossp/uuid
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-11-06 18:19:31
Subject: Re: BUG #4516: FOUND variable does not work after RETURN QUERY

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group