Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.132.154])
	by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1F1svx07541
	for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 14 Feb 2001 20:54:57 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1F1sp900443;
	Wed, 14 Feb 2001 20:54:51 -0500 (EST)
To: Alfonso Peniche <alfonso@iteso.mx>
cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: temp table creation 
In-reply-to: <3A8B2C47.465BBF9@iteso.mx> 
References: <3A8B2C47.465BBF9@iteso.mx>
Comments: In-reply-to Alfonso Peniche <alfonso@iteso.mx>
	message dated "Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:09:27 -0600"
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 20:54:51 -0500
Message-ID: <440.982202091@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200102/687
X-Sequence-Number: 4583

Alfonso Peniche <alfonso@iteso.mx> writes:
> What's wrong with this function? The syntax is supposed to be right,
> isn't it?

No, it isn't right, not for plpgsql.  SELECT INTO means something
different to plpgsql than it does in normal Postgres SQL.

			regards, tom lane