On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian Palmer <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > That's a good link, thanks Chris. I'm not sure it entirely answers what I'm > seeing though. It does explain why the outer select doesn't see the updated > values, but the other thing that I'm seeing is that sometimes the function > will update a row that was just inserted, and then the outer select will > return 0 results. It behaves as if from the view of the outer select, that > row doesn't exist yet. So I end up with a row in the table that's been > updated by the function, but never returned to the caller. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the WHERE is processed like an "intervening if" clause in Magic: The Gathering - it's checked both before and after the function is called. Perhaps this is solvable, but if not, I'd be inclined to treat it like C and avoid referencing and altering a variable in one expression (eg arr[i++]=i; is a bad idea). There are experts on this list, though, and I am not one :) ChrisA -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
