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

Re: [JDBC] Where are we on stored procedures?

From: "Francisco Figueiredo Jr(dot)" <fxjrlists(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br>
To:
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Where are we on stored procedures?
Date: 2005-03-01 02:11:05
Message-ID: 4223CF39.4060205@yahoo.com.br (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-jdbc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Markus Schaber wrote:
| Hi, Francisco,
|
| Francisco Figueiredo Jr. schrieb:
|
|
|>In fact, I think people keep requesting me support on Npgsql for that
|>because MS Sql server supports it and they are porting their code to use
|>Postgresql and facing that difficult.
|>
|>Indeed, for (a) we could use an approach similar to Ms sql server. We
|>could have a way of the procedure say if it wanted to send the rows
|>affected information or not.
|>And about (b) I think that it is only on trivial cases that people
|>really want to use this feature :)
|
|
| As you need to tweak the function/procedure source to implement (a), you
| can also tweak the function/procedure to return the row cound and
| whatever other diagnostics you need.

Yeap, You are right.
|
| For newly implemented stored procedures, we could create a special
| diagnostics result set that every procedure creates. This usually
| contains some success/error information, but the procedure could add
| additional rows to it.
|


I think this could be a very good idea. I think you could create an
special tag which would say to create this special resultset or not as,
I think, not every stored procedure would need it.

I think this would be very nice.

Thanks Markus, for feedback.



- --
Regards,

Francisco Figueiredo Jr.
Membro Fundador do Projeto MonoBrasil - MonoBrasil Project Founder Member
http://monobrasil.softwarelivre.org



- -------------
"Science without religion is lame;
religion without science is blind."

~                  ~ Albert Einstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQiPPOf7iFmsNzeXfAQLFYQgAkiBLkYi8lKQ6NNJ2qP48nH8PmODoe4Wp
FPB7lNvo9fLw0aw5rbztcu19FtvcJBJuFBFPc2LKImpszuJ2hcD02pTGqx3UxMR8
Yz3edTijCziHg8uBTiXQV0vHZ5WeE2/sEp+ve5heanDdzAcwLiCfDPxTR1XfVYaP
AJfLIHspwVkrXcEbtgwEdPX91QG/cLYjcRR/fhiaH4s8I3Hi3o9ZitQ4bkdOdosw
10+TMrgzbtXKdEOhWu9xgvdcujksjKi1xXXXSwr+L5WPi4y9iohnIi6X9j9wWlOw
fr9p2lYJgfzpq71Cl8dRlW+d0pRJFUlHiNaT/Adhzwsozc459Vix8Q==
=Jcuy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Oliver JowettDate: 2005-03-01 02:12:21
Subject: Re: Execute and PortalSuspended needs explicit transaction
Previous:From: Serguei A. MokhovDate: 2005-03-01 02:08:03
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Development Plans

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: St├ęphane RIFFDate: 2005-03-01 07:56:49
Subject: Connection pool problem
Previous:From: Markus SchaberDate: 2005-02-28 21:53:00
Subject: Re: Abandoning PGobject

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