Jan Wieck writes:
> On 11/20/2009 1:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Jan Wieck writes:
>>> But this brings up another point about the recent discussion of what
>>> RENAME is good for. Removing RENAME may conflict with using OLD/NEW in
>>> UPDATE ... RETURNING. No?
>>
>> Um ... not sure why. Specific
On 11/20/2009 1:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Jan Wieck writes:
But this brings up another point about the recent discussion of what
RENAME is good for. Removing RENAME may conflict with using OLD/NEW in
UPDATE ... RETURNING. No?
Um ... not sure why. Specific example please?
Jan Wieck writes:
> But this brings up another point about the recent discussion of what
> RENAME is good for. Removing RENAME may conflict with using OLD/NEW in
> UPDATE ... RETURNING. No?
Um ... not sure why. Specific example please?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via p
On 11/5/2009 4:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
So I was testing the next step of plpgsql modification, namely actually
letting the parser hooks do something, and it promptly blew up in
trigger functions, like so:
+ ERROR: OLD used in query that is not in a rule
+ LINE 1: SELECT OLD
+ ^
Tom,
> BTW, this brings up another point, which is that up to now it's often
> been possible to use plpgsql variable names that conflict with
> core-parser reserved words, so long as you didn't need to use the
> reserved word with its special meaning. That will stop working when
> this patch goes
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 04:33:07PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> So I was testing the next step of plpgsql modification, namely actually
> letting the parser hooks do something, and it promptly blew up in
> trigger functions, like so:
>
> + ERROR: OLD used in query that is not in a rule
> + LINE 1: SE
Robert Haas writes:
>> BTW, this brings up another point, which is that up to now it's often
>> been possible to use plpgsql variable names that conflict with
>> core-parser reserved words, so long as you didn't need to use the
>> reserved word with its special meaning. That will stop working whe
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> So I was testing the next step of plpgsql modification, namely actually
> letting the parser hooks do something, and it promptly blew up in
> trigger functions, like so:
>
> + ERROR: OLD used in query that is not in a rule
> + LINE 1: SELECT OLD
Tom Lane wrote:
> been possible to use plpgsql variable names that conflict with
> core-parser reserved words, so long as you didn't need to use the
> reserved word with its special meaning. That will stop working when
> this patch goes in. Doesn't bother me any, but if anyone thinks
it's
> a
So I was testing the next step of plpgsql modification, namely actually
letting the parser hooks do something, and it promptly blew up in
trigger functions, like so:
+ ERROR: OLD used in query that is not in a rule
+ LINE 1: SELECT OLD
+ ^
+ QUERY: SELECT OLD
+ CONTEXT: SQL st
10 matches
Mail list logo
