Robert Haas wrote:
> > 2009/1/10 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> >> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> >>> Uh, is this ready to be applied?
> >>
> >> I don't think any consensus has been reached on changing this behavior.
> >
> > I thing, so this is bug - RETURN QUERY has to supply FOR SELECT LOOP
> > RETURN NEXT pattern.
> >
> > My first patch expected so RETURN QUERY is final statement, so I don't
> > solve FOUND variable, but Heikki changed this behave.
> >
> > Without correct FOUND behave we can't to use RETURN QUERY for following pattern
> >
> > RETURN QUERY some;
> > IF FOUND THEN RETURN; END IF;
> > RETURN QUERY some_other;
> > RETURN;
>
> +1. I can't imagine it's good for this to be randomly inconsistent.
So should this be applied or just kept for 8.5?
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
