Re: new RETURNING clause and Pg.pm - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Brandon Metcalf
Subject Re: new RETURNING clause and Pg.pm
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.58L.0806261316470.9186@cash.us.nortel.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: new RETURNING clause and Pg.pm  ("Brandon Metcalf" <bmetcalf@nortel.com>)
List pgsql-general
b == bmetcalf@cash.us.nortel.com writes:

 b> t == tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:

 b>  t> "Brandon Metcalf" <bmetcalf@nortel.com> writes:
 b>  t> > I just upgraded to 8.3.3 and taking advantage of the RETURNING clause
 b>  t> > which is really cool.  I've found that with Pg.pm $r->resultStatus
 b>  t> > returns the integer "2" when the RETURNING clause is used on an
 b>  t> > insert.

 b>  t> > Of course, without using RETURNING the status is the constant
 b>  t> > PGRES_COMMAND_OK.

 b>  t> Sounds to me like a bug in Pg.pm --- it's probably not expecting
 b>  t> a result to come back from an INSERT.  You oughta nag its author
 b>  t> about that.


 b> I'll look through the Pg.pm code and see what I can find.


My mistake.  The constant that gets returned is PGRES_TUPLES_OK which
is what I would expect.  This corresponds to 2.

--
Brandon

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Michael Shulman"
Date:
Subject: Re: what are rules for?
Next
From: "Phillip Mills"
Date:
Subject: Partial Index Too Literal?