Re: Stored procedures vs Functions

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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