| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: plpgsql defensive mode |
| Date: | 2014-09-06 14:53:44 |
| Message-ID: | 540B1FF8.1010602@joh.to |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-09-06 4:41 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> On 6 sep 2014, at 16:32, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> wrote:
>>
>> How do you run queries which affect more than one row in this mode? Because that's crucial as well. We want something we can run 100% of our code on, but with a slightly more convenient syntax than PL/PgSQL provides right when coding defensively in the cases where exactly one row should be affected.
>
> If we would have ORDER BY also for UPDATE/DELETE then one could just
> order by something arbitrary to express multiple or zero rows are OK,
> even if not being interested in the order.
Ugh. That can't possibly end well. Overriding the meaning of something
that already works as standalone SQL statement sounds like a really bad
idea.
.marko
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-09-06 15:16:27 | Re: A mechanism securing web applications in DBMS |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-09-06 14:45:31 | Re: pg_dump warnings in MinGW build |