On 3/6/18 07:48, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote:
> Although as was discussed before it seems inconsistent without ROLLBACK
> support. There was a little discussion about it, but no replies. Maybe
> the status of the patch should be changed to 'Waiting on author' until
> the end of discussion.
I'm wondering what the semantics of it should be.
For example, consider this:
drop table test1;
create table test1 (a int, b int);
insert into test1 values (1, 11), (2, 22), (3, 33);
for x in update test1 set b = b + 1 where b > 20 returning a loop
raise info 'x = %', x;
if x = 2 then
The ROLLBACK call in the first loop iteration undoes the UPDATE command
that drives the loop. Is it then sensible to continue the loop?
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services