Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0209261915190.1149-100000@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian writes:

> To summarize, with non-INSTEAD, we get the tag, oid, and tuple count of
> the original query.  Everyone agrees on that.
>
> For non-INSTEAD, we have:

[I think this is the INSTEAD part.]

>     1) return original tag
>     2) return oid if all inserts in the rule insert only one row
>     3) return tuple count of all commands with the same tag

I think proper encapsulation would require us to simulate the original
command, hiding the fact that something else happened internally.  I know
it's really hard to determine the "virtual" count of an update or delete
if the command had acted on a permament base table, but I'd rather
maintain the encapsulation of updateable views and return "unknown" in
that case.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: Reconstructing FKs in pg_dump
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Reconstructing FKs in pg_dump