From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: patch for EXECUTE .. INTO (from TODO) |
Date: | 2005-06-02 07:56:11 |
Message-ID: | 1117698971.2605.33.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 11:30 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I did small trivial patch (almost all was written) for storing
> result from executing dynamic query into ROW or RECORD variable.
Cool, this will be useful. A few minor comments:
The patch needs some regression tests.
I'm not sure the parser modifications are quite right -- these
statements are treated as identical:
EXECUTE 'SELECT (row).* from (select row(10,1)::fxx) s'; _r;
EXECUTE 'SELECT (row).* from (select row(10,1)::fxx) s' INTO _r;
Accepting the former as valid syntax might mean misinterpreting some
function definitions (for example, EXECUTE '...'; var := 5). If you use
read_sql_construct() directly, you can use the *endtoken out parameter
to check whether the parser saw an INTO or a semicolon, and only look
for a following variable in the former case. In any case there's not
much point in defining plpgsql_read_expression2(), the rest of gram.y
just uses read_sql_construct() directly.
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-06-02 08:07:43 | Re: return_next for plperl (was Re: call for help) |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-06-02 06:43:46 | Re: COPY fast parse patch |