Re: plpgsql execute vs. SELECT ... INTO

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/05/2010 06:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > >> The comment on the commit says:
> > >> EXECUTE of a SELECT ... INTO now draws a 'not implemented' error,
> > >> rather than executing the INTO clause with non-plpgsql semantics
> > >> as it was doing for the last few weeks/months. This keeps our options
> > >> open for making it do the right plpgsql-ish thing in future without
> > >> creating a backwards compatibility problem. There is no loss of
> > >> functionality since people can get the same behavior with CREATE TABLE AS.
> > >> Do we really still need to keep out options open on this after all that
> > >> time?
> > > I think it's still a good idea that it won't do something that is very
> > > much different from what a non-EXECUTE'd SELECT INTO will do.
> > >
> > > I forget, is there a HINT there suggesting CREATE TABLE AS? Maybe we
> > > should add one if not.
> >
> > No, (see below) we should certainly improve that and document the
> > behavior, if we're going to keep it.
> >
> > if (*ptr == 'S' || *ptr == 's')
> > ereport(ERROR,
> > (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
> > errmsg("EXECUTE of SELECT ... INTO is not
> > implemented"),
> > errhint("You might want to use EXECUTE ...
> > INTO instead.")));
>
> Can someone suggest updated hint text, like this?
>
> errhint("You might want to use EXECUTE ... INTO or EXECUTE CREATE TABLE AS instead.")));

OK, suggested wording improvement applied with attached patch.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +