Re: Relax requirement for INTO with SELECT in pl/pgsql

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Relax requirement for INTO with SELECT in pl/pgsql
Date: 2016-03-21 23:33:49
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaHrLNdTE2H2thricOXYeOCwSedEoHYEvLpM357Fbb_dg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> So, I'm -1 on not having any keyword at all. I have no objection
> to Merlin's proposal though. I agree that PERFORM is starting to
> look a bit silly, since it doesn't play with WITH for instance.

Yeah, I think requiring PERFORM is stupid and annoying. +1 for
letting people write a SELECT with no target.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-03-22 00:03:41 Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2016-03-21 23:10:08 Re: Relax requirement for INTO with SELECT in pl/pgsql