David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> So it's a case of bad documentation, which we will fix very shortly. Sorry
>> for the noise.
> Please find attached a patch that fixes this.
Applied, thanks.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)--
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 05:29:20AM -0600, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom Lane said:
> > Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> I would agree that seems a little odd ;). Would this be something we
> >>> want done for 8.0?
> >
> >> I think we'd better. Otherwise, people will get used to the bro
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:24:20 -0800
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thank you ... I knew you guys celebrated later then us, just didn't
> > know why ... do you guys celebrate Remembrance Day same as us, or
> > different too? Ours is Nov 11 ...
>
> I don't even know what Remembe
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Thank you ... I knew you guys celebrated later then us, just didn't
>> know why ... do you guys celebrate Remembrance Day same as us, or
>> different too? Ours is Nov 11 ...
>
> I don't even know what Rememberance Day is ;)
WWI ended on November 1
Thank you ... I knew you guys celebrated later then us, just didn't know
why ... do you guys celebrate Remembrance Day same as us, or different
too? Ours is Nov 11 ...
I don't even know what Rememberance Day is ;)
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Se
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Humor the Canadian ... when is Thanksgiving? :)
Next week.. :) Thursday.
Thank you ... I knew you guys celebrated later then us, just didn't know
why ... do you guys celebrate Remembrance Day same as us, or different
too? Ours is Nov 11 ...
Marc
Humor the Canadian ... when is Thanksgiving? :)
Next week.. :) Thursday.
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services
(http://www.hub.org)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ:
7615664
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC a
Tom Lane said:
> Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> I would agree that seems a little odd ;). Would this be something we
>>> want done for 8.0?
>
>> I think we'd better. Otherwise, people will get used to the broken
>> syntax.
>
> Agreed. Someone's going to step up and patch this, no?
>
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Agreed. Someone's going to step up and patch this, no?
(Not me --- I've already wasted more hours than I could afford this week
on plperl.)
We can do it, but it will have to be after thanksgiving.
Humor the Canadian ... when is Thanksgiving? :)
Mar
Agreed. Someone's going to step up and patch this, no?
(Not me --- I've already wasted more hours than I could afford this week
on plperl.)
We can do it, but it will have to be after thanksgiving.
J
regards, tom lane
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JD
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I would agree that seems a little odd ;). Would this be something we
>> want done for 8.0?
> I think we'd better. Otherwise, people will get used to the broken syntax.
Agreed. Someone's going to step up and patch this, no?
(Not me --- I've already wa
Josh,
> I would agree that seems a little odd ;). Would this be something we
> want done for 8.0?
I think we'd better. Otherwise, people will get used to the broken syntax.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
It seems that in the new PL/Perl, the result of the spi_exec_query
function changes in meaning depending on the command. For a SELECT,
the value of
$res->{rows}
is a reference to an array of the result rows.
For a different command
$res->{rows}
is
Andrew, Peter,
> >It seems that in the new PL/Perl, the result of the spi_exec_query
> >function changes in meaning depending on the command. For a SELECT,
> >the value of
> >
> >$res->{rows}
> >
> >is a reference to an array of the result rows.
> >
> >For a different command
> >
> >$res->{rows}
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >$res->{rows}
> >
> >is a reference to an array of the result rows.
> >
> >For a different command
> >
> >$res->{rows}
> >
> >is a scalar containing the number of affected rows.
> I don't recall seeing any reply to this, but I'm inclined to agree
> with it.
>
> Joshua, any
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
It seems that in the new PL/Perl, the result of the spi_exec_query
function changes in meaning depending on the command. For a SELECT,
the value of
$res->{rows}
is a reference to an array of the result rows.
For a different command
$res->{rows}
is a scalar containing th
16 matches
Mail list logo
