Re: Stored Procedure

From: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>
To: Yves Vindevogel <yves(dot)vindevogel(at)implements(dot)be>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Stored Procedure
Date: 2005-11-23 05:13:14
Message-ID: 20051123051314.GB49008@winnie.fuhr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 11:20:09PM +0100, Yves Vindevogel wrote:
> 8.1, hmm, that's brand new.

Yes, but give it a try, at least in a test environment. The more
people use it, the more we'll find out if it has any problems.

> But, still, it's quite some coding for a complete recordset, not ?

How so? The examples I posted are almost identical to how you'd
return a composite type created with CREATE TYPE or SETOF that type,
except that you declare the return columns as INOUT or OUT parameters
and you no longer have to create a separate type. If you're referring
to how I wrote two sets of assignments and RETURN NEXT statements,
you don't have to do it that way: you can use a loop, just as you
would with any other set-returning function.

--
Michael Fuhr

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Luke Lonergan 2005-11-23 17:51:06 Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Previous Message Michael Fuhr 2005-11-23 05:05:17 Re: Stored Procedure