From: | Bryn Llewellyn <bryn(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane PostgreSQL <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, John W Higgins <wishdev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general list <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL: Spurious 22P02 error on "select col into var" when col is user-defined type |
Date: | 2021-08-10 00:00:39 |
Message-ID: | 0B8B7D5F-96C2-46B6-8050-37199598C002@yugabyte.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us wrote:
>
>> pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com writes:
>>
>> Some errors like this, but not this can be detected by plpgsql_check
>> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/okbob/plpgsql_check&source=gmail-imap&ust=1629148434000000&usg=AOvVaw3f9UAP7RvDPC2QKi3_4Mj0 - probably the heuristic for type
>> check is not complete.
>
> STRICTMULTIASSIGNMENT would detect most cases of this, except that the condition is checked too late. We'd need to count the fields
> *before* trying to assign values, not after.
>
> In the meantime, it does seem like the docs could be more explicit about this, and perhaps give an example showing the (x).* solution.
Tom, Pavel, and John, thanks for your quick responses. I've filed them all away and I'm hoping that I won't be caught out by this in the future.
It now seems to me to be odd, in the light of the explanations for why the naïve (PL/SQL-style) syntax doesn't work in PL/pgSQL, that assigning a scalar subquery to a variable of the composite type in question _does_ work! But don't take that as a question. I'm going to regard this as "case closed".
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2021-08-10 01:03:42 | Re: archive_command / single user mode |
Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2021-08-09 23:17:36 | archive_command / single user mode |