| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Date: | 2013-08-23 18:30:50 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRDvNBMm5kg4rs3yjHz2ZpxrN0j8VhqA_AOFA=YuFOzJLQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2013/8/23 Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
> Pavel,
>
> > But it can have a different reason. In T-SQL (Microsoft or Sybase) or
> MySQL
> > a unbound query is used to direct transfer data to client side.
>
> Are you planning to implement that in PL/pgSQL?
>
>
yes. I would to see a stored procedures with this functionality in pg
> Currently, PL/pgSQL requires RETURN ____ in order to return a query
> result to the caller. Is there some reason we'd change that?
>
>
it is different functionality.
> If you're implementing TSQL-for-PostgreSQL, of course you might want to
> have different behavior with SELECT. However, TSQL is not PL/pgSQL.
>
I don't would to implement T-SQL. Same functionality has a PSM in MySQL.
And in this moment, there is not any blocker why this should not be in
Postgres.
Regards
Pavel
> --
> Josh Berkus
> PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
> http://pgexperts.com
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-08-23 18:38:35 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-08-23 18:15:56 | A note about bug #8393 |