On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 7:56 PM Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 10:08, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > I'm skeptical. If we'd marked them that way from day one, it would have > > been fine, but to change it now is a whole different discussion. I think > > the odds that anybody will thank us are much smaller than the odds that > > there will be complaints. In particular, I'd be just about certain that > > there are people out there who are changing FOUND and loop control > > variables manually, and they will not appreciate us breaking their code. > > I kind of doubt it would break anybody's code. But I also doubt it's > actually going to help anybody. It's not exactly an easy bug to write, > so meh, I can't really get worked up either way about this.
We could retain the old behaviour by using a GUC which defaults to old behaviour. More GUCs means more confusion, this once guc under plpgsql extension might actually help.
I am not sure if other GUC can help (in this case). Probably it cannot be default, and beginners has zero knowledge to enable this or similar GUC.
