Re: [GENERAL] stored procedure revisited

amy cheng wrote:
>
> forgive my ignorance. why "multi-resultset, multi-level transaction" SP is
> so important? no work-around? I rememeber there were some discussion on
> multiple-return-value-function in the past. My impression is that they are
> not that crucial and usually can
> find rather simple work-arounds.
>

SP is important for a lot of reasons. First it allows faster network
transmission because you don't have to send the query over and over
again, second it allows for faster execution because the server doesn't
need to reparse the query every time, third it allows for conceptual
abstraction so the queries can be moved into the database layer, etc...
"multi-resultset, multi-level transaction" is just an indication of what
other database can do with SP's. All I want to know is if there is SP
for postgresql, or _better_than_SP_ alternatives.

Work-arounds are, exactly that, work-arounds. They are something that
will work _for_now_, but not the best solution. I ask the question not
because I don't know how to live without SP, but because I want to see
what the mentality is behind the whole thing - is there something
intrinsically wrong with having SP, or is there some better stuffs than
SP out there, etc. What makes a piece of software great? When its
developers do not settle for work-arounds.

My questions still stand. Please can someone fill in on the status with
SP, thanks.

Regards,

yin-so chen