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

AW: SQL99 functions

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
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: AW: SQL99 functions
Date: 2000-06-27 13:39:13
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C605BA599A@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> 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?

This is something Oracle pushed through, because that is how they do it.
I prefer the usual way of doing such things where you have parameters
and return values to functions (but return values should be multi column 
and multi row capable).

Andreas

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-06-27 13:39:41
Subject: Mailing List Archive Problem?
Previous:From: Zeugswetter Andreas SBDate: 2000-06-27 13:27:03
Subject: AW: Big 7.1 open items

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