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

RE: SQL99 functions

From: Peter Mount <petermount(at)it(dot)maidstone(dot)gov(dot)uk>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: SQL99 functions
Date: 2000-06-27 09:13:14
Message-ID: 1B3D5E532D18D311861A00600865478CF1AF9A@exchange1.nt.maidstone.gov.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Not knowing much on this side of things but in JDBC, CallableStatement
mentions things like IN, OUT & INOUT args - not sure about INOUT, but IN &
OUT are there. Perhaps OUT are not valid for selects, but are in stored
procedures?

Peter

--
Peter Mount
Enterprise Support
Maidstone Borough Council
Any views stated are my own, and not those of Maidstone Borough Council


-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 9:51 AM
To: Thomas Lockhart
Cc: Hackers List
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 functions 


Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> I see mention in SQL99 of function definitions which can have IN, OUT,
> and INOUT arguments. Any thoughts on how this could be supported in
> Postgres?

I noticed that but haven't quite figured out how it's supposed to fit
into the SQL worldview at all.  Surely
	SELECT foo(x) FROM table
shouldn't silently mutate into an UPDATE depending on how foo() is
declared.  Exactly where is a function with OUT args useful in SQL?

			regards, tom lane

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Giles LeanDate: 2000-06-27 09:38:35
Subject: Re: Proposal: More flexible backup/restore via pg_dump
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-06-27 09:07:03
Subject: Re: Proposal: More flexible backup/restore via pg_dump

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