Re: PL/Java issues

From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PL/Java issues
Date: 2004-01-04 01:07:36
Message-ID: 4366.24.211.141.25.1073178456.squirrel@www.dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

Dave Cramer said:
> Can you explain what you mean by this?
>
> On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 20:21, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Will we need to address this TODO item:
>>
>> . Add capability to create and call PROCEDURES
>>
>> before proceding to do PL/Java? It would add to the usefulness
>> greatly, I should think. I'm not sure how hard it would be.
>>

Well, it is syntactically unclean IMNSHO to have to define a return type
on an SP when you don't really need one, and to have to call it by
saying "select foo(bar)" rather than "call foo(bar)". Also, IIRC PL/SQL
lets you bind host language variables to OUT parameters of such SPs, which
can be quite useful. (It's a year or three since I touched Oracle in
anger.)

I would be mildly surprised if the SQL/JRT standard didn't expect to be
able to bind to static methods of type void.

(The item I quoted is on the TODO list - I didn't invent it ;-)

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-01-04 01:18:43 Re: Restrict users from describing table
Previous Message Rory Campbell-Lange 2004-01-03 23:18:39 Re: Is my MySQL Gaining ?

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joseph Shraibman 2004-01-04 05:18:20 SET AUTOCOMMIT TO OFF
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2004-01-03 15:28:41 Re: PL/Java issues