From: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: OUT parameters for plpgsql |
Date: | 2005-03-21 22:32:07 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0503220928390.929@linuxworld.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 21 Mar 2005, Greg Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> > The generic thing: you can write OUT and INOUT parameters in CREATE
> > FUNCTION. If you do, you can omit the RETURNS clause, in which case the
> > result type of the function is implicitly RECORD; or you can specify
> > RECORD explicitly; or you can specify SETOF RECORD; or, if there's just
> > one OUT/INOUT param, you can specify that param's type or SETOF it.
> > (When there is just one, should the default be to return that type
> > rather than a one-column RECORD?)
>
> Do other databases not allow you to specify a return value in addition to the
> OUT and INOUT parameters?
ANSI SQL allows at most one OUT parameter for a function (which can be
used instead of having the function return a value via the usual means).
AFAICT DB2 and Oracle reserve parameter functionality for procedures.
Gavin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-21 22:56:54 | Re: Excessive growth of pg_attribute and other system tables |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-03-21 21:30:57 | Re: Avoiding unnecessary writes during relation drop and |