On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 05:29:20AM -0600, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom Lane said:
> > Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> >>> I would agree that seems a little odd ;). Would this be something we
> >>> want done for 8.0?
> >
> >> I think we'd better. Otherwise, people will get used to the broken
> >> syntax.
> >
> > Agreed. Someone's going to step up and patch this, no?
> >
> > (Not me --- I've already wasted more hours than I could afford this
> > week on plperl.)
> >
>
> I knew I should have looked at this closer when Peter made his complaint -
> it sounded familiar. IIRC it was actually a point I raised about the
> original code, and it was fixed. At any rate, last night Abhijit Menon-Sen
> and I looked at the code and got confused becuse it appears to have been
> fixed ;-). "rows" only contains data and only exists if the result is from a
> successful select. "processed" is the row count, and is always present.
>
> So it's a case of bad documentation, which we will fix very shortly. Sorry
> for the noise.
Please find attached a patch that fixes this.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
