Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2009-04-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Thanks, patch applied. --- Andrew Gierth wrote: > > "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian writes: > > >> hi all, > >> > >> I read the code that it seems easy for the cursor in plpgsql to > >> return ROW_COUNT after MOVE LAST e

Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2009-03-27 Thread David Fetter
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:59:29PM +, Andrew Gierth wrote: > > "Tom" == Tom Lane writes: > > > Andrew Gierth writes: > >> GET DIAGNOSTICS ROW_COUNT is documented as working for all commands; > >> if it doesn't work for MOVE (and FETCH), that's a bug. > > Tom> Or a documentation prob

Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2009-03-27 Thread Andrew Gierth
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes: > Andrew Gierth writes: >> GET DIAGNOSTICS ROW_COUNT is documented as working for all commands; >> if it doesn't work for MOVE (and FETCH), that's a bug. Tom> Or a documentation problem. I don't see any claim that it works for Tom> "all commands" anyway. "

Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2009-03-27 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Gierth writes: > GET DIAGNOSTICS ROW_COUNT is documented as working for all commands; > if it doesn't work for MOVE (and FETCH), that's a bug. Or a documentation problem. I don't see any claim that it works for "all commands" anyway. regards, tom lane -- Sent vi

Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2009-03-27 Thread Andrew Gierth
> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian writes: >> hi all, >> >> I read the code that it seems easy for the cursor in plpgsql to >> return ROW_COUNT after MOVE LAST etc. The SPI_processed variable >> already there, but didn't put it into estate structure, any reason >> for that? >> >> thanks and

Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2009-03-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
laser wrote: > hi all, > > I read the code that it seems easy for the cursor in plpgsql to return > ROW_COUNT after > MOVE LAST etc. The SPI_processed variable already there, but didn't put > it into estate > structure, any reason for that? > > thanks and best regards Sorry, we have decide

Re: [HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2008-12-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
laser wrote: > hi all, > > I read the code that it seems easy for the cursor in plpgsql to return > ROW_COUNT after > MOVE LAST etc. The SPI_processed variable already there, but didn't put > it into estate > structure, any reason for that? [ Sorry for the delay.] Would some tests how Oracl

[HACKERS] Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?

2008-07-20 Thread laser
hi all, I read the code that it seems easy for the cursor in plpgsql to return ROW_COUNT after MOVE LAST etc. The SPI_processed variable already there, but didn't put it into estate structure, any reason for that? thanks and best regards -laser -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-