| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robin Abbi <robin(dot)abbi(at)downley(dot)net>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)postgres(dot)rocks>, Pg Docs <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Procedures |
| Date: | 2020-08-22 17:14:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20200822171447.GF26781@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 07:42:35PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 3:52 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
>
> > Agreed, this doc area needs help.
>
> I developed the attached patach for this. Is this sufficient?
>
>
> For consistency I would change "statement" to "command" at the end of that
> paragraph .
>
> the <xref linkend="sql-call"/> command.
>
> and to contrast with "a part of" I would modify the following fragment to read:
>
> a procedure is called in isolation
>
> Taken together:
>
> While a function is called as part of a query or DML command, a procedure is
> called in isolation using the <xref linked="sql-call"/> command.
>
> And then swap the order of, and tweak, the transaction and isolation sentences:
>
> [...] the CALL command. If the CALL command is not part of an explicit
> transaction a procedure can also manage multiple transactions during its
> execution.
OK, how is this updated patch?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| proc.diff | text/x-diff | 777 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-08-22 17:27:00 | Re: Document "59.2. Built-in Operator Classes" have a clerical error? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2020-08-22 17:08:54 | Re: Procedures |