| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | John Adams <john_adams_mail(at)yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: returning multiple result sets from a stored procedure |
| Date: | 2010-09-03 20:18:54 |
| Message-ID: | 29049.1283545134@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> I noticed in postgres you cannot return multiple result sets from a
>> stored procedure (surprisingly as it looks like a very good dbms).
> That feature has been on the TODO list for years. However, nobody has
> stepped forward to either write it, or to fund working on it. If your
> company has programmers or money to build this feature, it could
> probably get done fairly quickly (as in, next version).
Part of the reason it's sat on TODO is lack of consensus about how such
a feature ought to look/work; particularly since most of the discussion
about it has considered that it'd go along with stored procedures
executing outside of transactions. It's not just a matter of needing to
find some programming manpower.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-09-03 20:20:46 | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-03 20:17:01 | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |