From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SQL-standard function body |
Date: | 2020-07-01 22:56:24 |
Message-ID: | CA+hUKGK9pfNptAQDNaugsyectUCUk4nsH9EVDBqin+rUdzgEEw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:58 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:49 PM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > This adds support for writing CREATE FUNCTION and CREATE PROCEDURE
> > statements for language SQL with a function body that conforms to the
> > SQL standard and is portable to other implementations.
>
> With what other implementations is it compatible?
Judging by the Wikipedia article[1], it sounds like at least DB2 and
MySQL/MariaDB are purposely striving for conformance. When I worked
with DB2 a few years back I preferred to use their standard-conforming
PL stuff (as opposed to their be-more-like-Oracle PL/SQL mode), and I
always hoped that PostgreSQL would eventually understand the same
syntax; admittedly, anyone who has ever worked on large applications
that support multiple RDBMSs knows that there's more than just surface
syntax to worry about, but it still seems like a pretty solid plan to
conform to the standard that's in our name, so +1 from me on the
general direction (I didn't look at the patch).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2020-07-01 23:00:07 | Re: POC: rational number type (fractions) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-07-01 22:40:51 | Re: POC: rational number type (fractions) |