On 8/24/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> This reminds me of a consideration I had been intending to bring up on
> the mailing lists: what exactly do we want to do with the SPI API for
> RETURNING queries? The current behavior is that it still returns
> SPI_OK_INSERT and so on, but also creates a SPI_tuptable. Is this
> what we want? Perhaps we should invent additional return codes
> SPI_OK_INSERT_RETURNING etc.
I like adding RETURNING-specific return codes.
> Another issue I noted in that same area is that spi.c does not set
> SPI_processed for a utility statement, even if the utility statement
> returns tuples. Is this a bug, or should we leave it alone?
I think it's a bug.
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-08-24 20:14:31|
|Subject: Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build |
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2006-08-24 19:17:19|
|Subject: Re: PL/Perl: spi_prepare() and RETURNING|