2010/9/4 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>> I noticed in postgres you cannot return multiple result sets from a
>>> stored procedure (surprisingly as it looks like a very good dbms).
>>
>> That feature has been on the TODO list for years. However, nobody has
>> stepped forward to either write it, or to fund working on it. If your
>> company has programmers or money to build this feature, it could
>> probably get done fairly quickly (as in, next version).
>
> Also as mentioned upthread there are effective workarounds if you poke
> around a bit. This is a FAQ, and there are about 3-4 solid methods
> (if you search the archives) that cover most problems you would be
> looking at multiple results sets to solve. I suppose this is why
> there hasn't been more of an effort to do this earlier. People asking
> for this are typically dispossessed SQL server developers who haven't
> quite gotten used to the postgres way of things. Not that proper
> stored procedures wouldn't be great -- they would be -- but they are
> not the only way to solve these types of problems.
I had a prototype that can do multirecordset. But implementation of
non transact procedures needs a hundreds hours of work:
* outer SPI
* parametrization for non planner statements - for CALL statement
* explicit transaction control for procedures.
* client API support for multirecordset
* better support for OUT variables.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
>
> merlin
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
