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

Re: Passing arguments to views

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Mark Dilger <pgsql(at)markdilger(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Passing arguments to views
Date: 2006-02-03 18:58:30
Message-ID: 28187.1138993110@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Mark Dilger <pgsql(at)markdilger(dot)com> writes:
> If we are talking about inserting the function definition into the
> query as a subquery and then letting the parser treat it as a
> subquery, then I see no reason to use either the existing function or
> view subsystems.  It sounds more like we are discussing a macro
> language.

Which is pretty much what a SQL function is already.  I don't see a need
to invent a separate concept.  To the extent that macros have different
semantics than functions (eg, multiple evaluation of arguments) the
differences are generally not improvements IMHO ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark DilgerDate: 2006-02-03 19:00:06
Subject: Re: Passing arguments to views
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-02-03 18:54:37
Subject: Re: Passing arguments to views

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