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

Re: SQL: table function support

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL: table function support
Date: 2008-06-10 04:42:19
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-patches
2008/6/10 Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 13:03 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> this patch add support of table functions syntax like ANSI SQL 2003.
> I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I wonder if we really need
> *more* syntax variants for declaring set-returning functions. The
> existing patchwork of features is confusing enough as it is...

internally is table functions implemenation identical with SRF.
Semantically is far - user's doesn't specify return type (what is from
PostgreSQL), but specifies return table, what is more natural. What
more - for users is transparent chaotic joice betwen "SETOF RECORD"
for multicolumns sets and "SETOF type".


> -Neil

In response to


pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Pavan DeolaseeDate: 2008-06-10 05:32:48
Subject: VACUUM Improvements - WIP Patch
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2008-06-10 04:37:27
Subject: Re: SQL: table function support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group