On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> 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?
Well, *I* think it should be applied. But YMMV.
...Robert
