Re: I must be blind...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: I must be blind...
Date: 2002-06-14 22:25:53
Message-ID: 9540.1024093553@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

"Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> However, because PERFORM discards the results of a query it is only
> useful for side effects of the query. My usage of it was wrong since I
> wasn't using it for side effects merely for determining the existance
> of a result without having to store that result since it wasn't
> required. Therefore, with the correct syntax of PERFORM <query> my
> function doesn't generate an 'unprogrammed' error but the test of
> FOUND always fails, i.e. result is NOT FOUND. Therefore SELECT INTO
> dummy ... is still the correct thing for me to be doing.

Okay. I guess the next question is whether PERFORM *should* be setting
FOUND. Seems like it might be a reasonable thing to do.

Does PERFORM exist in Oracle's plsql? If so, what does it do?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Carter 2002-06-14 22:31:40 Re: large database on postgres
Previous Message Nigel J. Andrews 2002-06-14 22:22:35 Re: I must be blind...

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2002-06-14 23:07:56 Re: Making serial survive pg_dump
Previous Message Nigel J. Andrews 2002-06-14 22:22:35 Re: I must be blind...