"Marko Tiikkaja" <marko@joh.to> writes:
> If I'm counting correctly, we have four votes for this patch and two votes
> against it.
> Any other opinions?
FWIW, I share Peter's poor opinion of this syntax. I can see the
appeal of not having to write an explicit check of the rowcount
afterwards, but that appeal is greatly weakened by the strange syntax.
(IOW, if you were counting me as a + vote, that was only a vote for
the concept --- on reflection I don't much like this implementation.)
regards, tom lane
