Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function

st 11. 9. 2019 v 11:51 odesílatel Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
napsal:

> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:40 AM Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > st 11. 9. 2019 v 7:45 odesílatel Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> napsal:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 9:09 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The current example shows the usage of looping in plpgsql, so as such
> >> > there is no correctness issue, but OTOH there is no harm in updating
> >> > the example as proposed by Ian Barwick. Does anyone else see any
> >> > problem with this idea? If we agree to proceed with this update, it
> >> > might be better to backpatch it for the sake of consistency though I
> >> > am not sure about that.
> >> >
> >>
> >> While checking the patch in back-branches, I noticed that it doesn't
> >> get applied to 9.4 due to the way the example forms the string. I
> >> have done the required changes for 9.4 as well and attached is the
> >> result.
> >>
> >
> > Is question if for this queries should not be used some from
> information_schema instead direct access to pg_catalog.
> >
> > But I looked now, and we don't see materialized views in
> information_schema - what is probably bug.
> >
>
> I think you got the answer of this on a related thread. Do you see
> any other problems or have any concerns about this?
>

no

Pavel

> --
> With Regards,
> Amit Kapila.
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>