Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> SQL standard:
>> <SQL-data access indication> ::=
>> NO SQL
>> | CONTAINS SQL
>> | READS SQL DATA
>> | MODIFIES SQL DATA
> Huh. I understand three of those, but what is the use of CONTAINS
> SQL? Seems like that would have to be the same as the last one,
> or maybe the next-to-last one if you're prepared to assume it's
> read-only SQL.
On a quick search of the spec, the best I was able to tell was that
you are required to use "CONTAINS SQL" if the language is SQL.
Perhaps it figures that the database engine can determine the
read/write behavior directly if the language is SQL, and you tell it
what it does if you're coding in some other language.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Chris Browne||Date: 2010-03-01 23:11:48|
|Subject: Re: Anyone know if Alvaro is OK?|
|Previous:||From: Maciej Mrozowski||Date: 2010-03-01 23:08:31|
|Subject: [Feature request] variable declaration of anonymous composite data type in PL/pgSQL|