Re: PostgresQL equivalent of NOCOUNT

From: Jochem van Dieten <jochemd(at)oli(dot)tudelft(dot)nl>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgresQL equivalent of NOCOUNT
Date: 2001-08-14 16:20:29
Message-ID: 3B794FCD.1020703@oli.tudelft.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:

> Jochem van Dieten <jochemd(at)oli(dot)tudelft(dot)nl> writes:
>
>>Does PostgresQL have some way to make update, insert and delete queries
>>not return the number of affected rows? I know that in MS SQL one would
>>use NOCOUNT for that.
>>
>
> Uh ... why? Seems like a useless anti-feature. Certainly suppressing
> the count wouldn't save a noticeable number of cycles.

I am not in it for the cycles, just for the laziness ;)
Currently working with a ColdFusion frontend through ODBC, and
ColdFusion is unable to return 2 resultsets for one call to cfquery (the
ColdFusion query implementation). In MS SQL I would use the query below
to suppress one resultset and return the primary key of the recently
inserted record.

SET NOCOUNT ON
INSERT INTO ()
VALUES ()
SELECT @@IDENTITY AS 'Identity'
SET NOCOUNT OFF

I was wondering if something like that is possible in PostgresQL. I know
I can wrap it in a transaction and do a second query or build a
procedure to do it, but this would be much easier (presuming I can use
curval('primary_key_seq') instead of @@identity).

Any suggestions?

Jochem

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeremy Hansen 2001-08-14 16:25:54 do I have a reserved word here or something???
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2001-08-14 16:18:02 Re: [BUGS] triggers