Re: Ridicolus Postgresql review

* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:

| server. PostgreSQL supports both of these things just fine. A whole
| 'nother thing is the ability to return result sets from functions.
|
| OK, other vendors may call the latter for "stored procedures", but that is
| terminological nonsense. And going out there writing an article claiming
| that in PostgreSQL "users do not have the ability to create their own
| stored procedures", without further qualification, is confusing at best.

That's not nonsense at all, you can't just go around and redefine the
language used in the database world at your own whims.

Everybody I know employed in the database arena thinks of a stored procedure
as something that may return result sets. In PostgreSQL it cannot and
does therefore not fit the term stored procedure.

What is confusing is the PostgreSQL use of the term "stored
procedure". To me it sounds like bad marketing, something we really
shouldn't need in the open source world.

--
Gunnar Rønning - gunnar(at)polygnosis(dot)com
Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/