From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <list-pgsql-general(at)dynworks(dot)com> |
Cc: | "SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)" <michael_shelton(at)non(dot)hp(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Stored procedures vs Functions |
Date: | 2001-12-21 21:54:55 |
Message-ID: | 200112212154.fBLLsta22441@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Stored procedures/functions are not able to return result sets. You might be
> able to use a combination of functions and views to accomplish your task in a
> similar way. Functions and stored procedures are interchangable when refering
> to postgres. You can write a stored procedure in any of several built in
> languages (PL == procedural language): PL/PgSQL, PL/perl, PL/python, PL/tcl;
> alternatively, you can make your own language (although that involves a
> considerable amount of effort).
Some people return results in temp tables, 7.2 will allow cursors to be
returned.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Ford | 2001-12-21 23:02:25 | Re: anyone knows about pam_pgsql ? |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2001-12-21 21:20:45 | Re: Stored procedures vs Functions |