Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches
Date
Msg-id 24698.989527969@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-jdbc
> +            /* I use CMD_UPDATE, because no CMD_MOVE or the like
> +               exists, and I would like to provide the same
> +               kind of info as CMD_UPDATE */
> +            UpdateCommandInfo(CMD_UPDATE, 0, -1*estate->es_processed);

I do not think it is a good idea to return a negative count for a
backwards move; that is too likely to break client code that parses
command result strings and isn't expecting minus signs.  The client
should know whether he issued MOVE FORWARD or MOVE BACKWARDS anyway,
so just returning es_processed ought to be sufficient.

Otherwise I think the patch is probably OK.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches
Next
From: "Mihai Gheorghiu"
Date:
Subject: Driver