On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 21:53 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> This has been saved for the 8.2 release:
Just to clarify: the "SELECT INTO EXACT" patch was abandoned in favor of
the "#option select_into_1_row" patch. I submitted both patches as part
of the same -patches thread, but the latter solution,
This has been saved for the 8.2 release:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> I can attach a patch that supports [EXACT | NOEXACT].
Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> I can attach a patch that supports [EXACT | NOEXACT].
>>
>> Somehow, proposing two new reserved words instead of one doesn't seem
>> very responsive to my gripe :-(.
> My intention was to introduce the idea that the current behavior should
> be changed,
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 17:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 17:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I dislike the choice of "EXACT", too, as it (a) adds a new reserved word
> >> and (b) doesn't seem to convey quite what is happening anyway. Not
Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 17:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I dislike the choice of "EXACT", too, as it (a) adds a new reserved word
>> and (b) doesn't seem to convey quite what is happening anyway. Not sure
>> about a better word though ... anyone?
> I can att
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 17:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch implements an optional EXACT keyword after the INTO keyword
> > of the PL/pgSQL SELECT INTO command. ... when SELECTing INTO ...
> > leave the targets untouched if the query does not
> > ret
Sorry, patch removed from the queue. I now see the later discussion.
---
Matt Miller wrote:
> This patch implements an optional EXACT keyword after the INTO keyword
> of the PL/pgSQL SELECT INTO command. The motivation is
This has been saved for the 8.2 release:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
---
Matt Miller wrote:
> This patch implements an optional EXACT keyword after the INTO keyword
> of the PL/pgSQL SELECT
> > The motivation is to come closer
> > to Oracle's SELECT INTO behavior: when SELECTing INTO scalar targets,
> > raise an exception and leave the targets untouched if the query does not
> > return exactly one row.
> why that is not the default behavior of the SELECT INTO?
> ...
> i mean, when yo
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 17:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The motivation is to come closer to Oracle's SELECT INTO
> > behavior: when SELECTing INTO scalar targets,
> > raise an exception and leave the targets untouched if the query does
> > not return exactly
On 7/29/05, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch implements an optional EXACT keyword after the INTO keyword
> > of the PL/pgSQL SELECT INTO command. The motivation is to come closer
> > to Oracle's SELECT INTO behavior: when SELECTing INTO s
Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This patch implements an optional EXACT keyword after the INTO keyword
> of the PL/pgSQL SELECT INTO command. The motivation is to come closer
> to Oracle's SELECT INTO behavior: when SELECTing INTO scalar targets,
> raise an exception and leave the target
This patch implements an optional EXACT keyword after the INTO keyword
of the PL/pgSQL SELECT INTO command. The motivation is to come closer
to Oracle's SELECT INTO behavior: when SELECTing INTO scalar targets,
raise an exception and leave the targets untouched if the query does not
return exactly
13 matches
Mail list logo
