From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: plpgsql: open for execute - add USING clause |
Date: | 2010-01-14 07:19:49 |
Message-ID: | 162867791001132319p1966a61dw7e495ca4ae424ef6@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2010/1/14 Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>:
>
> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> ok, I accept all comments.
>> revised version are attached.
>
> Good. This patch is ready to commit. I'll do it soon if no objections.
>
> BTW, I found inconsistent parameter dumps in the codes. Some of them
> add '$', but others does not. Are they intentional? Or, should we
> adjust them to use one of the formats?
>
> [pl_funcs.c]
> dump_dynexecute()
> dump_raise()
> printf(" parameter %d: ", i++);
> dump_dynfors()
> dump_open()
> dump_return_query()
> printf(" parameter $%d: ", i++);
>
isn't parameter of raise statement different than query parameter?
I thing so $x convention respects parameter holder syntax.
Regards
Pavel
>
> Regards,
> ---
> Takahiro Itagaki
> NTT Open Source Software Center
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matteo Beccati | 2010-01-14 07:22:29 | Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-01-14 07:17:04 | Re: plpython3 |