Re: INS/UPD/DEL RETURNING for 8.2

On 3/2/06, Jonah H. Harris <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 3/2/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> > "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > > INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE seem to work fine in normal operation but there
> > is an
> > > error with DELETE RETURNING when used through PL/pgSQL.
> >
> > Probably other places too. I don't see any provision here for ensuring
> > that the variables used in the RETURNING list are actually computed by
> > the plan. This would be masked in the INSERT and non-join UPDATE cases
> > by the fact that the plan has to compute all columns of the target table
> > anyway ... but in a DELETE it'd be an issue.
> >
> > I think set-returning functions in the RETURNING list might give you
> > some fits too ...
>
>
> Yeah, I got to looking into the special tuple handling code in execUtils
> for retrieving the old (deleted) tuple and there's something definitely
> getting lost along the way in some cases.
>

I've been stewing on this and haven't yet come up with anything. Have you
any thoughts on how we can accomplish this better?

--
Jonah H. Harris, Database Internals Architect
EnterpriseDB Corporation
732.331.1324