Re: AW: Re: [INTERFACES] USE OF CURSORS IN ECPG

From: Christof Petig <christof(dot)petig(at)wtal(dot)de>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: Maurizio <maurizio(dot)c(at)libero(dot)it>, Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: AW: Re: [INTERFACES] USE OF CURSORS IN ECPG
Date: 2000-11-10 12:49:33
Message-ID: 3A0BEEDD.530A3557@wtal.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:

> > PS: You might consider applying the patch for (update where > not_found) -> 100
>
> No, this is not allowed. sqlcode is supposed to be 0 in above case.
> You need to explicitly check for the number of rows updated in your
> program if needed.
>
> Andreas

According to my reading of the SQL standard this is the only compliant behaviour. Do
you know better?

Christof

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-11-10 15:03:07 Re: Must a C state transition function use palloc on the returned value?
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB 2000-11-10 12:10:19 AW: Re: [INTERFACES] USE OF CURSORS IN ECPG