From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: paul.kulakov@systematica.ru
cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18195: PL/pgSQL: invalid syntax allowed in SELECT INTO
 statement
In-reply-to: <18195-95ee8b48a9d7cd93@postgresql.org>
References: <18195-95ee8b48a9d7cd93@postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Tue, 14 Nov 2023 13:00:00 +0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2486680.1699975861.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:31:01 -0500
Message-ID: <2486681.1699975861@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2486681.1699975861%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> 1. The following code is successfully executed although it has incorrect
> syntax: there must be comma (,) between _n and _s in 'into' section.

>    select 1, 'string1', 'string2'
>    into _n _s;

I believe this is being read the same as

    select 1, 'string1', 'string2' _s into _n;

That is, the lack of a comma causes the INTO sub-clause to end,
and then _s is taken as an AS-less column label.  As the manual
explains, for backwards-compatibility reasons we allow INTO to be
embedded anywhere in the command, even though that leads to
surprising-looking cases like this one.

As for the question of why you don't get an error for the wrong
number of INTO targets, again that's backwards compatibility.
There's a "strict_multi_assignment" check you can turn on to make
it complain about that [1].

			regards, tom lane

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/plpgsql-development-tips.html#=
PLPGSQL-EXTRA-CHECKS