Re: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 01:12:17PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Moreover, I've been wondering about the behavior detail given in the > table at > . > In scenario 3, the declare statement says con1 but the subsequent > dynam

Re: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

"kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com" writes: >> If a solid case can be made that ECPG's DECLARE STATEMENT was done >> wrong, we'd be better off to just revert the feature out of v12 >> and try again, under less time pressure, for v13. > I see, I'll propose this at the next commitfest. > But I'm now consid

RE: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

Dear Peter, I want to complement about another purpose. This is that declaring an SQL identifier. In the oracle (and maybe DB2), the following example is not allowed: ... EXEC SQL DECLARE cursor CURSOR FOR stmt; EXEC SQL PREPARE stmt FOR "SELECT ..." ... T

RE: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

Dear all, Hi, thank you for replying. > It seems far too late to be considering any major rewrite for v12; > If a solid case can be made that ECPG's DECLARE STATEMENT was done > wrong, we'd be better off to just revert the feature out of v12 > and try again, under less time pressure, for v13.

Re: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

On 2019-09-11 18:04, Michael Meskes wrote: Is it acceptable for PG12? >>> In general absolutely. >> >> It seems far too late to be considering any major rewrite for v12; >> even assuming that there was consensus on the rewrite being an >> improvement, which I bet there won't be. > > Oops, I r

Re: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

> > > Is it acceptable for PG12? > > In general absolutely. > > It seems far too late to be considering any major rewrite for v12; > even assuming that there was consensus on the rewrite being an > improvement, which I bet there won't be. Oops, I read 13. Yes, it's obviously way too late for 12.

Re: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

Michael Meskes writes: > Hi Kuroda-san, >> In order to modify bugs, I think many designs, implementations, >> and specifications should be changed. > I hope the authors of said patch speak up and explain why they > implemented it as is. >> Is it acceptable for PG12? > In general absolutely. I

Re: A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

Hi Kuroda-san, > This feature, committed last February, has some bugs. > ... > * This syntax does not have oracle compatibility. This in itself is not a bug. If the syntax is not standard compliant, then it's a bug. That of course does not mean we would not like to be Oracle compatible where poss

A problem presentaion about ECPG, DECLARE STATEMENT

Dear ALL, I want to report and consult about DECLARE STATEMENT. This feature, committed last February, has some bugs. * This is not thread-independent. * If some cursors are declared for the same SQL identifier, only one cursor you declared at last is enabled. * This syntax does not have oracl