Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0209112136320.1307-100000@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Jan Wieck writes:

> I think we will have no chance to really return the number of
> VIEW-tuples affected. So any implementation is only a guess and we could
> simply return fixed 42 if "some" tuples where affected at all. This
> return is as wrong (according to Steve) as everything else but at least
> we have a clear definition what it means.

Maybe we should return something to the effect of "unknown, but something
happened".  I can see that returning 0 in case of doubt might confuse
applications.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re:
Next
From: elein
Date:
Subject: Re: