Re: PL/pgSQL bug?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL bug?
Date: 2001-08-13 14:05:02
Message-ID: 16692.997711502@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>> that plpgsql's handling of command-counter changes is broken, but it
>> does not follow that sprinkling the code with SetQuerySnapshot is wise.

> Why do you blame PL/pgSQL for that? I don't see a single
> reference to the command counter from the PL/pgSQL sources.
> All it does is using SPI. So does "using SPI" by itself count
> as "boken"?

Sorry: SPI is broken, not plpgsql. Does that make you feel better?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 2001-08-13 14:11:23 Re: PL/pgSQL bug?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-08-13 13:57:17 Re: Re: [PATCHES] Select parser at runtime