| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> | 
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: PERFORM effects FOUND patch (Was: I must be blind...) | 
| Date: | 2002-06-15 16:28:16 | 
| Message-ID: | 14572.1024158496@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers | 
"Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> + 		if (estate->eval_processed != 0)
> + 			exec_set_found(estate, true);
To be actually useful the command would have to set FOUND to either
true or false depending on whether it computed a row or not.  So the
correct patch would be more like
+ exec_set_found(estate, (estate->eval_processed != 0));
Also, changing the parameter to exec_run_select as you did is wrong.
A multi-row query should be allowed to run to completion, I'd think.
As for whether to apply it or not --- the change seems reasonable if we
were working in a vacuum.  But I don't believe we invented PERFORM out
of whole cloth; surely there are other systems that we need to consider
compatibility with.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-15 17:39:33 | Re: Mac os x | 
| Previous Message | Justin Clift | 2002-06-15 16:22:39 | Re: Would a PostgreSQL only hosting environment be of | 
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew Tedder | 2002-06-15 16:37:07 | Re: Big Test Environment Feature | 
| Previous Message | mmendez | 2002-06-15 16:20:21 | please help me with psql! |