Re: Problem using set-returning functions

From: Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
Cc: PostGIS Users Discussion <postgis-users(at)postgis(dot)refractions(dot)net>, PostgreSQL SQL List <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Problem using set-returning functions
Date: 2006-03-27 15:14:50
Message-ID: 4428016A.7020006@logix-tt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Hi, Stephan,

Stephan Szabo wrote:

> It's an implementation detail. Some languages handle SRFs in a way that
> can be handled in the select list (SQL and C I think) and others do not
> (plpgsql).

Ah, that's an enlightening explanation, thanks.

> The latter will likely change at some point, although there are
> some confusing issues with SRFs in the select list as well, see the
> difference in behavior between:
>
> select generate_series(1,10), generate_series(1,5);
> vs
> select * from generate_series(1,10) g1, generate_series(1,5) g2;

I know that the SRF special semantics are ugly, and would vote for
adjacent tables to be implemented as replacement.

Markus
--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS

Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-27 15:48:30 Re: Problem using set-returning functions
Previous Message PFC 2006-03-27 15:12:49 Re: Expressing a result set as an array (and vice versa)?