From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Valentine Gogichashvili <valgog(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Can't use WITH in a PERFORM query in PL/pgSQL? |
Date: | 2011-10-20 20:01:45 |
Message-ID: | 14230.1319140905@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I didn't design a PERFORM statement. There is two views - somebody
> from sybase's family know so SELECT without into is forwarded to
> client. This functionality is missing on Oracle's family. Is true so
> PERFORM statement is strange, but maybe it's open door for sybase's
> functionality that was not implemented ever.
I cannot imagine that we'd ever make SELECT inside a plpgsql function
act like that. Functions have no business directly transmitting
information to the client; if they tried, they'd most likely just break
the FE/BE protocol.
There might be use for such a thing in a hypothetical "real stored
procedure language" where the code is executing in a context entirely
different from what Postgres functions run in ... but that language
would be something different from plpgsql.
I grant the argument that people coming from Sybase-ish DBs might be
confused by this; but the current arrangement is also confusing lots
of people, so I don't think that argument has all that much weight.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-10-20 20:03:21 | Re: Can't use WITH in a PERFORM query in PL/pgSQL? |
Previous Message | Sachin Srivastava | 2011-10-20 18:05:23 | Re: BUG #6263: \l causes core dump with large database |