Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: BUG #2096: bug in a SPI sample document

BUG #2096: bug in a SPI sample document

From
"Yoshihisa Nakano"
Date:
The following bug has been logged online:

Bug reference:      2096
Logged by:          Yoshihisa Nakano
Email address:      nakano.yosihisa@jp.fujitsu.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.1.0
Operating system:   RedHat Enterprise Linux ES 3.0
Description:        bug in a SPI sample document
Details:

There is a difference between the result of the SPI
example in the doc and the actual result of that.


Doc 40.5 Examples
=> SELECT * FROM a;
 x
---
 1                  -- no rows in a (0) + 1
(1 row)

=> INSERT INTO a VALUES (execq('SELECT * FROM a', 0) + 1);
INFO:  EXECQ:  0
INSERT 167713 1


I tried this example, but INFO showed 1, not 0. I
think the value of INFO in doc is wrong, because the
value of row is 1 at this time.

This bug seems to exist also in 7.3.x, 7.4.x and 8.0.x.

Re: BUG #2096: bug in a SPI sample document

From
Tom Lane
Date:
"Yoshihisa Nakano" <nakano.yosihisa@jp.fujitsu.com> writes:
> => INSERT INTO a VALUES (execq('SELECT * FROM a', 0) + 1);
> INFO:  EXECQ:  0
> INSERT 167713 1

> I tried this example, but INFO showed 1, not 0.

Yeah ... the INSERT won't show an OID by default anymore, either.
Fixed; thanks for the report!

            regards, tom lane

Re: BUG #2096: bug in a SPI sample document

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
This documentation bug has been fixed.  We currently have:

    => SELECT * FROM a;
     x
    ---
     1                  -- no rows in a (0) + 1
    (1 row)

    => INSERT INTO a VALUES (execq('SELECT * FROM a', 0) + 1);
    INFO:  EXECQ:  1
    INSERT 0 1

Is the "INSERT 0 1" right?  I see an oid in your example, but that might
be because we no longer user oids by default.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yoshihisa Nakano wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference:      2096
> Logged by:          Yoshihisa Nakano
> Email address:      nakano.yosihisa@jp.fujitsu.com
> PostgreSQL version: 8.1.0
> Operating system:   RedHat Enterprise Linux ES 3.0
> Description:        bug in a SPI sample document
> Details:
>
> There is a difference between the result of the SPI
> example in the doc and the actual result of that.
>
>
> Doc 40.5 Examples
> => SELECT * FROM a;
>  x
> ---
>  1                  -- no rows in a (0) + 1
> (1 row)
>
> => INSERT INTO a VALUES (execq('SELECT * FROM a', 0) + 1);
> INFO:  EXECQ:  0
> INSERT 167713 1
>
>
> I tried this example, but INFO showed 1, not 0. I
> think the value of INFO in doc is wrong, because the
> value of row is 1 at this time.
>
> This bug seems to exist also in 7.3.x, 7.4.x and 8.0.x.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

--
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  SRA OSS, Inc.   http://www.sraoss.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Re: BUG #2096: bug in a SPI sample document

From
NAKANO Yoshihisa
Date:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> This documentation bug has been fixed.  We currently have:
>
>     => SELECT * FROM a;
>      x
>     ---
>      1                  -- no rows in a (0) + 1
>     (1 row)
>
>     => INSERT INTO a VALUES (execq('SELECT * FROM a', 0) + 1);
>     INFO:  EXECQ:  1
>     INSERT 0 1
>
> Is the "INSERT 0 1" right?  I see an oid in your example, but that might
> be because we no longer user oids by default.

Yes.  IIRC, Tom had already pointed out that and fixed.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-12/msg00071.php

Regards,
Yoshihisa Nakano