Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7606.1295024834@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements. (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR
REPLACE statements.
Re: [PATCH] Return command tag 'REPLACE X' for CREATE OR REPLACE statements. |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ene 14 08:40:07 -0300 2011: >> Also, I don't really like the way this spreads knowledge of the >> completionTag out all over the backend. I think it would be better to >> follow the existing model used by the COPY and COMMIT commands, >> whereby the return value indicates what happened and >> standard_ProcessUtility() uses that to set the command tag. > Yeah, that looks ugly. However it's already ugly elsewhere: for example > see PerformPortalFetch. I am not sure if it should be this patch's > responsability to clean that stuff up. (Maybe we should decree that at > least this patch shouldn't make the situation worse.) I thought we were going to reject the patch outright anyway. The compatibility consequences of changing command tags are not worth the benefit, independently of how ugly the backend-side code may or may not be. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: