Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24698.989527969@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches
Re: Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
> + /* I use CMD_UPDATE, because no CMD_MOVE or the like > + exists, and I would like to provide the same > + kind of info as CMD_UPDATE */ > + UpdateCommandInfo(CMD_UPDATE, 0, -1*estate->es_processed); I do not think it is a good idea to return a negative count for a backwards move; that is too likely to break client code that parses command result strings and isn't expecting minus signs. The client should know whether he issued MOVE FORWARD or MOVE BACKWARDS anyway, so just returning es_processed ought to be sufficient. Otherwise I think the patch is probably OK. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: