On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 11:38:47AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >>BTW, we intentionally didn't put any provision for parameters into DO
> >>originally. What's changed to alter that decision?
> >It just concept - nothing more. And my instinct speak so inline code
> >block without external parametrization is useless.
> You have said this before, IIRC, but frankly your instinct is just
> wrong. It is no more useless than are parameter-less functions, and
> I use those frequently. I used a DO block for some useful testing
> just the other day.
In my opinion its even *more* useful than parameterless
functions. In many cases you will use DO to write upgrade scripts or
In both cases its not really much of diference whether you write the
parameter inside the function or outside (as a parameter to it) and
escaping is not a critical part anyway.
So maybe I am missing the point of this discussion?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Pavel Stehule||Date: 2010-07-04 16:41:15|
|Subject: Re: proof concept: do statement parametrization|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-07-04 16:22:32|
|Subject: Re: proof concept: do statement parametrization |