Re: Returning from a rule with extended query protocol

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Rychlewski <greg(dot)rychlewski(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Returning from a rule with extended query protocol
Date: 2024-08-11 21:54:25
Message-ID: 59493.1723413265@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Rychlewski <greg(dot)rychlewski(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I was testing creating a rule that uses RETURNING and noticed a difference
> between the extended query protocol and the simple query protocol. In the
> former, RETURNING is ignored (at least in my case) and the latter it is
> respected:

I think this might be the same issue recently discussed here:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1df84daa-7d0d-e8cc-4762-85523e45e5e7%40mailbox.org

That discussion was leaning towards the idea that the cost-benefit
of fixing this isn't attractive and we should just document the
discrepancy. However, with two reports now, maybe we should rethink.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2024-08-11 22:22:53 Re: Fix memory counter update in reorderbuffer
Previous Message Jelte Fennema-Nio 2024-08-11 20:15:41 Re: Returning from a rule with extended query protocol