On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 10:24 AM Jan Behrens <jbe-mlist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 19:02:48 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Here, "DELETE FROM magic" returns multiple result sets, even though it
> > is only a single SQL statement.
>
> Right, so it's kind of a case that you have to support. We're not
> likely to rip out rules anytime soon, even if they're a bit
> deprecated.
As it seems to be a corner case that rarely occurs in practice, I was
considering to simply not support this case in my client library. I
don't know which SQL error code I could return in that case though.
Maybe "0A000" (feature_not_supported) or
"21000" (cardinality_violation). Not sure if either of those is a good
choice. Any better idea?
If you are asking if "rules" can be ignored or error-walled in terms of your library design, I'd say yes. 100% yes.
The main caveat would then be the proposed multi-resultset stored procedure feature, which might break the 'one result per semicolon' assumption you might be chasing as it has some basis in the standard, so I'd be balancing risk/reward against that feature IMO if I were you.
merlin
