Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements.
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 7606.1295024834@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements. (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR
REPLACE statements.
Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements. |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ene 14 08:40:07 -0300 2011:
>> Also, I don't really like the way this spreads knowledge of the
>> completionTag out all over the backend. I think it would be better to
>> follow the existing model used by the COPY and COMMIT commands,
>> whereby the return value indicates what happened and
>> standard_ProcessUtility() uses that to set the command tag.
> Yeah, that looks ugly. However it's already ugly elsewhere: for example
> see PerformPortalFetch. I am not sure if it should be this patch's
> responsability to clean that stuff up. (Maybe we should decree that at
> least this patch shouldn't make the situation worse.)
I thought we were going to reject the patch outright anyway. The
compatibility consequences of changing command tags are not worth the
benefit, independently of how ugly the backend-side code may or may
not be.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: