Re: plpgsql - additional extra checks

From: Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plpgsql - additional extra checks
Date: 2017-01-13 11:55:58
Message-ID: CAL9smLBJQC_c_dfcJ9KMz=gHPQ7BCN0VpSBqdsgfkWF983-B4Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:

> On 1/11/17 5:54 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> + <term><varname>too_many_rows</varname></term>
>> + <listitem>
>> + <para>
>> + When result is assigned to a variable by <literal>INTO</literal>
>> clause,
>> + checks if query returns more than one row. In this case the
>> assignment
>> + is not deterministic usually - and it can be signal some issues in
>> design.
>>
>
> Shouldn't this also apply to
>
> var := blah FROM some_table WHERE ...;
>
> ?
>
> AIUI that's one of the beefs the plpgsql2 project has.
>

No, not at all. That syntax is undocumented and only works because
PL/PgSQL is a hack internally. We don't use it, and frankly I don't think
anyone should.

.m

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dilip Kumar 2017-01-13 13:06:16 Re: Parallel bitmap heap scan
Previous Message Amit Khandekar 2017-01-13 11:38:05 Too many autovacuum workers spawned during forced auto-vacuum