| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, depstein(at)alliedtesting(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgagarinov(at)alliedtesting(dot)com, vshahov(at)alliedtesting(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Can't use WITH in a PERFORM query in PL/pgSQL? |
| Date: | 2011-10-19 20:45:58 |
| Message-ID: | 19518.1319057158@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The point being, how do I convert any query to a non WITH variant so
> it can be PERFORM'd? Anyways, I always thought having to do perform
> at all was pretty weak sauce -- not sure why it's required.
Possibly it was an Oracle compatibility thing ... anyone know PL/SQL
well enough to say how this works there?
I suppose you could argue that selecting a value and implicitly throwing
it away is confusing to novices, but on the other hand I've seen a whole
lot of novices confused by the need to write PERFORM instead of SELECT.
I think it wouldn't be an unreasonable thing to just interpret a SELECT
with no INTO clause as being a PERFORM (ie execute and discard results).
Then we'd not have to do anything magic for commands starting with WITH.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-10-19 21:21:54 | Re: Can't use WITH in a PERFORM query in PL/pgSQL? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-19 20:41:05 | Re: incompatible pointer type |