Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRC9cg=yuGQGAi8AR6ZkWQX_Lr-897A9ZG3EWP6zv209tw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function
List pgsql-hackers


st 11. 9. 2019 v 7:45 odesílatel Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> napsal:
On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 9:09 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The current example shows the usage of looping in plpgsql, so as such
> there is no correctness issue, but OTOH there is no harm in updating
> the example as proposed by Ian Barwick.  Does anyone else see any
> problem with this idea?  If we agree to proceed with this update, it
> might be better to backpatch it for the sake of consistency though I
> am not sure about that.
>

While checking the patch in back-branches, I noticed that it doesn't
get applied to 9.4 due to the way the example forms the string.  I
have done the required changes for 9.4 as well and attached is the
result.


Is question if for this queries should not be used some from information_schema instead direct access to pg_catalog.

But I looked now, and we don't see materialized views in information_schema - what is probably bug.

Pavel
 
Ian, if possible, can you once check the patch for 9.4?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: don't see materialized views in information_schema