| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | stefan_berglund(at)msn(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is This A Set Based Solution? |
| Date: | 2007-03-10 05:37:08 |
| Message-ID: | 7887.1173505028@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Stefan Berglund <stefan_berglund(at)msn(dot)com> writes:
> Below is a small test case that illustrates what I'm attempting which is
> to provide a comma separated list of numbers to a procedure which
> subsequently uses this list in a join with another table.
> My questions are is this a set based solution and is this the best
> approach in terms of using the data types and methods afforded by
> PostgreSQL? I'm mostly inquiring about the double FOR loop which just
> doesn't feel right to me ...
It looks pretty ugly to me too, but you haven't explained your problem
clearly enough for anyone to be able to recommend a better solution path.
Why do you feel you need to do this? What is the context?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-03-10 05:42:46 | Re: query ... returned 4 columns |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2007-03-10 05:32:34 | Re: Tsearch2 / Create rule on select |