Re: FOUND not set by EXECUTE?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Wheeler
Тема Re: FOUND not set by EXECUTE?
Дата
Msg-id 44F8DF5C-F843-4F06-ABD3-50F2AA2CA910@kineticode.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: FOUND not set by EXECUTE?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Apr 8, 2006, at 14:38, Tom Lane wrote:

> It *is* documented: the manual lists the statements that affect FOUND,
> and EXECUTE is not among them.
>
> Whether it should be is another question, but that's a definition
> disagreement (a/k/a enhancement proposal) not a bug.

I think that:

a. It should be (it'd be very useful, without a doubt).
b. Until it is, the docs should explicitly mention that EXECUTE   does not affect found. No, EXECUTE is not in the
list,and   UPDATE, INSERT, and DELETE are, and although I'm using them   in an EXECUTE statement rather than directly
inthe PL/pgSQL,   it still seemed rather confusing, because they're still   UPDATE, INSERT, and DELETE.
 

So yes, it's a definition disagreement, but I think that things could  
be clearer.

Thanks,

David


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Gregory Maxwell"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Support Parallel Query Execution in Executor
Следующее
От: "Luke Lonergan"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Support Parallel Query Execution in Executor