Excerpts from Noah Misch's message of jue mar 08 12:11:37 -0300 2012: > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 04:57:12PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > As a side note, the documentation for PQexec() is misleading about > > what will happen if COPY is present in a multi-command string. It > > says: "Note however that the returned PGresult structure describes > > only the result of the last command executed from the string. Should > > one of the commands fail, processing of the string stops with it and > > the returned PGresult describes the error condition. It does not > > explain that it also stops if it hits a COPY. I had to read the > > source code for libpq to understand why this psql logic was coded the > > way it is. > > Agreed; I went through a similar process. Awhile after reading the code, I > found the behavior documented in section "Functions Associated with the COPY > Command": > > If a COPY command is issued via PQexec in a string that could contain > additional commands, the application must continue fetching results via > PQgetResult after completing the COPY sequence. Only when PQgetResult > returns NULL is it certain that the PQexec command string is done and it is > safe to issue more commands. > > I'm not quite sure what revision would help most here -- a cross reference, > moving that content, duplicating that content. Offhand, I'm inclined to move > it to the PQexec() documentation with some kind of reference back from its > original location. Thoughts? I would vote for moving it and adding a reference in the COPY functions section. That way, the PQexec doc is complete by itself without having to duplicate anything. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
