On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 01:13:51PM +0000, Rajeev rastogi wrote: > ________________________________________ > From: pgsql-bugs-ow...@postgresql.org [pgsql-bugs-ow...@postgresql.org] on > behalf of Bruce Momjian [br...@momjian.us] > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 8:46 AM > To: Tom Lane > Cc: Robert Haas; Hitoshi Harada; pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; > pgsql-hack...@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #6572: The example of SPI_execute is bogus > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:29:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Hitoshi Harada <umi.tan...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > >>> Given the lack of complaints since 9.0, maybe we should not fix this > > >>> but just redefine the new behavior as being correct? But it seems > > >>> mighty inconsistent that the tuple limit would apply if you have > > >>> RETURNING but not when you don't. In any case, the ramifications > > >>> are wider than one example in the SPI docs. > > > > >> To be honest, I was surprised when I found tcount parameter is said to > > >> be applied to even INSERT. I believe people think that parameter is > > >> to limit memory consumption when returning tuples thus it'd be applied > > >> for only SELECT or DML with RETURNING. So I'm +1 for non-fix but > > >> redefine the behavior. Who wants to limit the number of rows > > >> processed inside the backend, from SPI? > > > > > Yeah. > > > > Okay, apparently nobody cares about RETURNING behaving differently from > > non-RETURNING, so the consensus is to redefine the current behavior as > > correct. That means what we need is to go through the docs and see what > > places need to be updated (and, I guess, back-patch the changes to 9.0). > > I will get to this if nobody else does, but not right away. > > > Would someone make the doc change outlined above? Thanks. > > > I would like to work on this documentation bug. > As per analysis I am planning to update following SPI function: > 1. SPI_Execute: Here we will mention that argument count is used only for the > kind of command which returns result i.e. all kind of SELECT and DML with > returning clause. count is ignored for any other kind of commands. I will add > one example also to indicate the difference. > 2. SPI_execute_plan_with_paramlist: Here we can give just reference to > SPI_execute i.e. I will mention that count has same interpretation as in > SPI_execute. > 3. SPI_execp: Here we can give just reference to SPI_execute i.e. I will > mention that count has same interpretation as in SPI_execute.
Would someone please provide answers to these questions, or write a patch? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
