Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements

From: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements
Date: 2002-07-23 15:47:57
Message-ID: 1027439278.6596.36.camel@jester
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 11:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) writes:
> > Regarding the syntax for EXECUTE, it occurs to me that it could be made
> > to be more similar to the PREPARE syntax -- i.e.
>
> > PREPARE foo(text, int) AS ...;
>
> > EXECUTE foo('a', 1);
>
> > (rather than EXECUTE USING -- the effect being that prepared statements
> > now look more like function calls on a syntactical level, which I think
> > is okay.)
>
> Hmm, maybe *too* much like a function call. Is there any risk of a
> conflict with syntax that we might want to use to invoke stored
> procedures? If not, this is fine with me.

Stored procedures would use PERFORM would they not?

I like the function syntax. It looks and acts like a temporary 'sql'
function.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2002-07-23 16:33:21 Re: contrib/ltree for 7.2 or 7.3 ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-07-23 15:42:37 Re: [PATCHES] Demo patch for DROP COLUMN

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-07-23 16:46:15 Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-07-23 15:42:37 Re: [PATCHES] Demo patch for DROP COLUMN