On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 19:49, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 19:39, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Ugh. Grepping around, it looks like pltcl_process_SPI_result
> > is missing a case for SPI_OK_MERGE as well.
>
> Yes, I was about to post a patch for that too. That's the last case
> that
On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 19:39, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ugh. Grepping around, it looks like pltcl_process_SPI_result
> is missing a case for SPI_OK_MERGE as well.
>
Yes, I was about to post a patch for that too. That's the last case
that I found, looking around.
Regards,
Dean
Dean Rasheed writes:
> Another one noticed from the MERGE RETURNING patch -- the switch
> statement in SPI_result_code_string() is missing cases for
> SPI_OK_TD_REGISTER and SPI_OK_MERGE.
Ugh. Grepping around, it looks like pltcl_process_SPI_result
is missing a case for SPI_OK_MERGE as well.
Another one noticed from the MERGE RETURNING patch -- the switch
statement in SPI_result_code_string() is missing cases for
SPI_OK_TD_REGISTER and SPI_OK_MERGE.
The SPI_OK_TD_REGISTER case goes back all the way, so I suppose it
should be back-patched to all supported branches, though evidently
thi
