Re: SQL procedures

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL procedures
Date: 2017-11-08 14:54:17
Message-ID: 17774.1510152857@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 10/31/17 14:23, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Why not use VOIDOID for the prorettype value?

> We need a way to distinguish functions that are callable by SELECT and
> procedures that are callable by CALL.

Do procedures of this ilk belong in pg_proc at all? It seems like a large
fraction of the attributes tracked in pg_proc are senseless for this
purpose. A new catalog might be a better approach.

In any case, I buy none of your arguments that 0 is a better choice than a
new pseudotype.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-11-08 15:04:47 Re: SQL procedures
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2017-11-08 14:46:37 Re: SQL procedures