Tom Lane wrote:
>Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>><snip>
>>
>
><snip>
>
>Another possibility, given that any app using a feature like this is
>nonportable anyway, is to extend the INSERT statement along the lines
>that someone (maybe Larry R? I forget now) proposed before:
>
> INSERT INTO foo ... RETURNING x,y,z,...
>
>where x,y,z, etc are expressions in the variables of the inserted
>tuple(s). This could be made to look like a SELECT at the protocol
>level, which would mean that it wouldn't break client libraries or
>require a protocol bump, and it's *way* more flexible than any
>hardwired decision about what columns to return. It wouldn't have
>any problem with multiple tuples inserted by an INSERT ... SELECT,
>either.
>
This would be a good thing (tm). I use Oracle quite extensively as well
as PG and Oracle's method of "RETURNING :avalue" is very good for
returning values from newly inserted rows.
There was some talk a while back about [not?] implementing variable
binding. This seems to become very closely related to that. It would
seem to solve the problem of having a unique identifier returned for
inserts. I'm sure it would please quite a few people in the process,
especially ones moving across from Oracle. (kill two birds with one stone)
>
>
regards, tom lane
>
Ashley Cambrell
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
