Sorry I thought Zoltan's explanation was clear enough. All prior ECPG versions were fine because dynamic cursor names were only added in 9.0. Apparently only this one place was missed. So this is a bug in the new feature, however not such a major one that it warrants the complete removal IMO. I'd prefer to fix this in 9.0.1.
Hope this cleans it up a bit. Michael "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> schrieb: >Michael Meskes <mich...@fam-meskes.de> wrote: > >> I'd consider this a bug. > >Could you explain why? The assertions that people consider it a bug >without explanation of *why* is confusing for me. > >It sounds more like a feature of the ECPG interface that people >would really like, and which has been technically possible since >PostgreSQL 8.3, but for which nobody submitted a patch until this >week. There was some hint that a 9.0 ECPG patch added new features >which might make people expect this feature to have also been added. >If this patch isn't necessarily correct, and would be dangerous to >apply at this point, should the other patch be reverted as something >which shouldn't go out without this feature? > >-Kevin -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
