On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:19 AM, Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo.romano@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well it is in 8.5 Devel, so it could have been added immediately after your thread started yesterday, I'm honestly not sure.
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/plpgsql-statements.html
Sorry for not posting that. Either way, I if you really want a feature like this added, it's usually better to take people's word and then make the case for adding the feature. If you declare it a bug and get belligerent, it makes it harder to get features you'd like added. I would say that coming into this asking for a new feature would maybe have helped gain more ground.
Good luck
--Scott
PS -- I did see this in the 8.3 Docs after writing this note:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/plpgsql-implementation.html
and I do see it here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql-implementation.html
2010/1/14 Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxx>:
Really?> On Wednesday 13 January 2010 2:17:51 pm Scott Mead wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Vincenzo Romano <
>>
>> vincenzo.romano@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > It is not the check or the select.
>> > It is the way the substitution has been implemented. It looks like the
>> > code replaces the variable name and not the value.
>> > Which is different from what is written at page 800.
>> > I only hope they won't change the manual to match the feature/bug
>> > (warning: new joke)
>>
>> Page 800:
>>
>> "Another restriction on parameter symbols is that they only work in SELECT,
>> INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE commands. In other statement types (generically
>> called utility statements), you must insert values textually even if they
>> are just data values."
>
> Scott, thanks for that I must have read through that section several times at
> least with out picking up on it.
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxx
>
That section is not in any page of the v8.4.2 documentation either PDF or HTML.
The sentence has been introduced (yesterday?) in 8.5devel, which is
far from being "current".
So that was not a joke at all! :-(
I only hope they won't change the manual to match the feature/bug
(warning: new joke)
Well it is in 8.5 Devel, so it could have been added immediately after your thread started yesterday, I'm honestly not sure.
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/plpgsql-statements.html
Sorry for not posting that. Either way, I if you really want a feature like this added, it's usually better to take people's word and then make the case for adding the feature. If you declare it a bug and get belligerent, it makes it harder to get features you'd like added. I would say that coming into this asking for a new feature would maybe have helped gain more ground.
Good luck
--Scott
PS -- I did see this in the 8.3 Docs after writing this note:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/plpgsql-implementation.html
and I do see it here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql-implementation.html
--
Vincenzo Romano
NotOrAnd Information Technologies
NON QVIETIS MARIBVS NAVTA PERITVS
