Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SQL: table function support

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL: table function support
Date: 2008-06-12 19:21:40
Message-ID: 1213298500.11470.150.camel@jd-laptop (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 12:05 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 05:56:59PM -0700, Neil Conway wrote:

> I went and got reports from the field.  Over the years, I've had to
> explain at great length and with no certain success to developers at a
> dozen different companies how to use OUT parameters.  RETURNS
> TABLE(...) is *much* more intuitive to those people, who have a
> tendency to do things like create temp tables rather than figure out
> the OUT parameter syntax afresh.

Regardless of whether anyone thinks they are byzantine (or not) if
RETURNS TABLE() is in the standard. We should try and implement it if we
can.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: davegDate: 2008-06-12 19:30:25
Subject: Re: SQL: table function support
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2008-06-12 19:05:05
Subject: Re: SQL: table function support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group