| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Provide rowcount for utility SELECTs |
| Date: | 2010-02-01 20:42:02 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f071002011242s3b4cc887yd79021cb2cd3a145@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2010/1/12 Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>:
> Tom Lane írta:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>
>>> But it would be broken in very obvious ways, no? It's not like it would
>>> be silently broken and thus escape testing ...
>>>
>>
>> Well, if we wanted to adopt that approach, we should add the count to
>> *all* SELECT tags not just a small subset. As the patch stands it
>> seems entirely possible that a breakage would escape immediate notice.
>>
>
> Can you give me an example that would return
> plain "SELECT" after my new patch? I added
> one more change to the patch, is it enough to return
> "SELECT N" in every case now?
I just tested this, so I can say definitely: no. I hacked psql with
the attached patch, and if you just do a plain old SELECT * FROM
table, you get back only SELECT, not SELECT N.
...Robert
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| hack-psql-command-tag.c | text/x-csrc | 775 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-02-01 20:57:54 | Re: plpython3 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-02-01 20:35:39 | Re: plpython3 |