On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:58 PM Bryn Llewellyn <b...@yugabyte.com> wrote:
> > r := (my_c1, my_c2)::s.t; > If you write s.x there it will also work. Your first and third assignments are identical in syntax/nature. These are both the first examples here[1] Yes, the behavior of INTO in the second assignment is somewhat non-intuitive; but covered here[2]. Probably it could use more examples. The final form fits into a procedural flow better than the SQL-based one. Since plpgsql allows for procedural flow this makes sense. The composite variable reference is simply: main_type_name.field_name Hence the second example here[1] [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/plpgsql-statements.html#PLPGSQL-STATEMENTS-ASSIGNMENT [2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/plpgsql-statements.html#PLPGSQL-STATEMENTS-SQL-ONEROW David J.
