| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Константин <beholder(at)mmska(dot)ru>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PLPGSQL and FOUND stange behaviour after EXECUTE |
| Date: | 2004-10-04 13:54:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20422.1096898066@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, this has been on my to-do list for awhile...
> Ah, ok. Is this something you want to handle, or should I take a look?
Well, it's not *high* on my to-do list; feel free to take a look.
>> One question here is whether Oracle's PL/SQL has a
>> precedent, and if so which way does it point?
> I did some limited testing of this, and it appears that PL/SQL's EXECUTE
> IMMEDIATE modifies SQL%FOUND.
Hm, okay, then we should probably think about doing so too.
If the EXECUTE executes something that's not
SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, should it clear FOUND? Or leave it alone?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-04 14:22:38 | Re: BUG #1278: PL/pgSQL: ROWTYPE does not care for droped columns |
| Previous Message | PostgreSQL Bugs List | 2004-10-04 11:33:05 | BUG #1278: PL/pgSQL: ROWTYPE does not care for droped columns |