I've found some evidence that RETURNING already existed in 8i which is enough for not adding a compatibility error FWIW. https://bitbucket.org/zzzeek/sqlalchemy/issues/1878 http://www.dba-oracle.com/t_release_dates.htm
Cheers, Nikita On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:57:54 AM UTC+3, Nikita Shilnikov wrote: > > OK, that's good. If I get any question about this, I will reach you here > or on the IRC channel. Otherwise I'll send a PR and we'll discuss the > details there. > > RETURNING was introduced in 10g (released in 2006) so the feature won't be > available for earlier versions (with a proper error message). > > Cheers, > Nikita > > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:21:15 AM UTC+3, Jeremy Evans wrote: >> >> On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 1:08:27 PM UTC-8, Nikita Shilnikov wrote: >>> >>> It seems that Sequel doesn't use returning statements and use home-grown >>> sequence generation instead. I wonder if there is any particular reason for >>> querying a sequence after each INSERT statement and not using RETURNING? I >>> could add support for this feature. >>> >> >> I don't think there is a particular reason. Do you know what versions of >> Oracle support RETURNING? Assuming Sequel can be setup to only use >> RETURNING on those versions, and you provide a pull request that implements >> support and the oracle adapter tests pass with it (rake spec_oracle), it >> should be able to go in. >> >> Thanks, >> Jeremy >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
