From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
Date: | 2013-08-20 13:05:33 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRATCj1v9VFU3baN8p26A_cpj9=vKEjNMem8Tzkn6LqEbQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2013/8/20 David E. Wheeler <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>
> On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
> >> I am passing the values returned from a CTE to a call to pg_notify(). I
> do not care to collect the output of pg_notify(), which returns VOID.
> >
> > it is little bit different issue - PL/pgSQL doesn't check if returned
> type is VOID - it can be allowed, I am thinking. So check of empty result
> can be enhanced.
>
> I am confused. I do not need to check the result (except via FOUND). But I
> am sure I can think of other situations where I am calling something where
> I do not care about the result, even if it returns one.
>
When you would to ignore result, then you should to use a PERFORM -
actually, it is limited now and should be fixed. Have no problem with it.
I don't would to enable a free unbound statement that returns result.
Regards
Pavel
>
> Best,
>
> David
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-08-20 13:08:08 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]) |
Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2013-08-20 13:01:10 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |