Hi, On 2010-02-03 11:04 UTC+2, Takahiro Itagaki wrote: > Hi, I'm reviewing the writable CTE patch. The code logic seems to be > pretty good, but I have a couple of comments about error cases: > > * Did we have a consensus about user-visible "DML WITH" messages? > The term is used in error messages in many places, for example: > "DML WITH without RETURNING is only allowed inside an unreferenced CTE" > Since we don't use "DML WITH" nor "CTE" in documentation, > I'd like to avoid such technical acronyms in logs if we had better names, > or we should have a section to explain them in docs.
We have yet to reach a consensus on the name for this feature. I don't think we have any really good candidates, but I like "DML WITH" best so far. > * What can I do to get "Recursive DML WITH statements are not supported" > message? I get syntax errors before I get the message because We don't > support UNIONs with RETURNING queries. Am I missing something? > > =# UPDATE tbl SET i = i + 1 WHERE i = 1 > UNION ALL > UPDATE tbl SET i = i + 1 WHERE i = 2; > ERROR: syntax error at or near "UNION" WITH RECURSIVE t AS (INSERT INTO foo SELECT * FROM t) VALUES(true); would do that. You can do the same with UPDATE .. FROM and DELETE .. USING. > * The patch includes regression tests, but no error cases in it. > More test cases are needed for stupid queries. Ok, I'll add these and send an updated patch in a few hours. Regards, Marko Tiikkaja -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
