Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Proposal: real procedures again (8.4)

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
To: Josh Berkus <Josh(dot)Berkus(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: real procedures again (8.4)
Date: 2007-10-27 21:05:26
Message-ID: 1193519126.18398.17.camel@hannu-laptop (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Ühel kenal päeval, L, 2007-10-27 kell 12:55, kirjutas Josh Berkus:
> Merlin, Pavel,
> > Mutable session variables would be nice, but I'll take a plpgsql
> > langauge (or psm) with or without them, so long as transactions are
> > manual.  It's possible to emulate variables using scalar functions
> > with the desired volatility currently (but you still have to be
> > careful with transactions).
> The other big useful feature we're missing from Functions is multisets. 

I think that support for multisets has been removed from our fe-be
protocol implementation bit-by-bit.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2007-10-27 21:10:21
Subject: Re: Proposal: real procedures again (8.4)
Previous:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2007-10-27 20:22:10
Subject: Re: Proposal: real procedures again (8.4)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group