Allow executemany to return rows - #1110
Closed
LeonardBesson wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Sorry, something went wrong.
LeonardBesson
force-pushed
the
executemany-returning
branch
from
a0376e1 to
ebcf3af
Compare
December 23, 2023 16:37
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
Plausible. I'm not a fan of changing the function signature based on the argument though. I think this should be a separate method, e.g. fetchmany or something like that (though could be somewhat confusing for DB-API users). |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
Ability to return values added as fetchmany in #1175. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #448
This is a proposed change to support executemany with INSERT ... RETURNING.
The PR adds a flag parameter to executemany, but adding a seperate method like fetchmany was also mentioned.
@elprans would you consider something along those lines? I think the value here is allowing to take advantage of the query pipelining from executemany while avoiding the limitations of the proposed workarounds (like DEFAULT as mentioned in your stackoverflow post)