From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, PGDG <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: plpgsql EXECUTE will not set FOUND |
Date: | 2009-10-23 14:16:23 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070910230716j347f6521i1b40d8a8f86dac9b@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> writes:
>> I'll go search for more, meantime I'll just add the main goal of this
>> new thread is to have -hackers know there is a real user demand for
>> having EXECUTE set FOUND the same way it sets GET DIAGNOSTIC.
>
> [shrug...] There is also real user demand for not silently breaking
> code that works now, which is what we risk anytime we change the set
> of statements that can set FOUND.
We've had this discussion before and I'm still unpersuaded by your
position. I *never* write "IF FOUND THEN" except immediately after
the statement where I expect that variable to be set, and I submit
that anyone who who does write code that relies on certain statements
not setting FOUND is, IMO, depending on a bug. We don't and shouldn't
have a policy of making future PostgreSQL releases bug-compatible with
previous releases.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2009-10-23 14:24:23 | Re: Using views for row-level access control is leaky |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-23 14:04:29 | Re: Using views for row-level access control is leaky |