Re: [Plperlng-devel] Re: Concern about new PL/Perl
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [Plperlng-devel] Re: Concern about new PL/Perl |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1666.24.211.141.25.1100863760.squirrel@www.dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [Plperlng-devel] Re: Concern about new PL/Perl (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [Plperlng-devel] Re: Concern about new PL/Perl
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane said: > Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >>> I would agree that seems a little odd ;). Would this be something we >>> want done for 8.0? > >> I think we'd better. Otherwise, people will get used to the broken >> syntax. > > Agreed. Someone's going to step up and patch this, no? > > (Not me --- I've already wasted more hours than I could afford this > week on plperl.) > I knew I should have looked at this closer when Peter made his complaint - it sounded familiar. IIRC it was actually a point I raised about the original code, and it was fixed. At any rate, last night Abhijit Menon-Sen and I looked at the code and got confused becuse it appears to have been fixed ;-). "rows" only contains data and only exists if the result is from a successful select. "processed" is the row count, and is always present. So it's a case of bad documentation, which we will fix very shortly. Sorry for the noise. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: