On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 17:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The motivation is to come closer to Oracle's SELECT INTO > > behavior: when SELECTing INTO scalar targets, > > raise an exception and leave the targets untouched if the query does > > not return exactly one row. This patch does not go so far as > > to raise an exception
> Uh, what's the point of being only sort-of compatible? Why not throw > the exception? I guess my hesitation is that the PL/SQL notion of the exception as a program flow control technique is a bit at odds with the PL/pgSQL notion of the exception as a transaction control mechanism. Maybe these notions could be reconciled by a new NOSAVE option to the EXCEPTION block definition, to suppress the savepoint and the exception-induced rollback for that BEGIN ... END block. Then an automatically-thrown exception would not be so expensive. > I dislike the choice of "EXACT", too, as it (a) adds a new > reserved word and (b) doesn't seem to convey quite what is > happening anyway The motivation is that EXACTly one row must be returned. Maybe UNIQUE instead of EXACT? ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings