Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.44.0209261915190.1149-100000@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian writes: > To summarize, with non-INSTEAD, we get the tag, oid, and tuple count of > the original query. Everyone agrees on that. > > For non-INSTEAD, we have: [I think this is the INSTEAD part.] > 1) return original tag > 2) return oid if all inserts in the rule insert only one row > 3) return tuple count of all commands with the same tag I think proper encapsulation would require us to simulate the original command, hiding the fact that something else happened internally. I know it's really hard to determine the "virtual" count of an update or delete if the command had acted on a permament base table, but I'd rather maintain the encapsulation of updateable views and return "unknown" in that case. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: