2010/12/17 Tom Lane :
> Pavel Stehule writes:
>> 2010/12/17 Tom Lane :
>>> I'm not really impressed with this idea: there's no a priori reason
>>> that all those loop types would necessarily have exactly the same
>>> control logic.
>
>> There is no reason why the processing should be same, but act
Pavel Stehule writes:
> 2010/12/17 Tom Lane :
>> I'm not really impressed with this idea: there's no a priori reason
>> that all those loop types would necessarily have exactly the same
>> control logic.
> There is no reason why the processing should be same, but actually is same.
Yes, and it mi
2010/12/17 Alvaro Herrera :
> Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of vie dic 17 07:02:00 -0300 2010:
>> Hello
>>
>> This patch remove redundant rows from PL/pgSQL executor (-89 lines).
>> Doesn't change a functionality.
>
> Hmm I'm not sure but I think the new code has some of the result values
>
2010/12/17 Tom Lane :
> Pavel Stehule writes:
>> This patch remove redundant rows from PL/pgSQL executor (-89 lines).
>> Doesn't change a functionality.
>
> I'm not really impressed with this idea: there's no a priori reason
> that all those loop types would necessarily have exactly the same
> con
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of vie dic 17 07:02:00 -0300 2010:
> Hello
>
> This patch remove redundant rows from PL/pgSQL executor (-89 lines).
> Doesn't change a functionality.
Hmm I'm not sure but I think the new code has some of the result values
inverted. Did you test this thorough
Pavel Stehule writes:
> This patch remove redundant rows from PL/pgSQL executor (-89 lines).
> Doesn't change a functionality.
I'm not really impressed with this idea: there's no a priori reason
that all those loop types would necessarily have exactly the same
control logic.
Hello
This patch remove redundant rows from PL/pgSQL executor (-89 lines).
Doesn't change a functionality.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
*** ./src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c.orig 2010-12-16 10:25:37.0 +0100
--- ./src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c 2010-12-17 10:50:31.793623763 +0100
***
***
