Re: [HACKERS] SQL procedures

On 11/22/2017 01:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 11/20/17 16:25, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> We should document where returned values in PL procedures are ignored
>>> (plperl, pltcl) and where they are not (plpython, plpgsql). Maybe we
>>> should think about possibly being more consistent here, too.
>> Yeah, suggestions? I think it makes sense in PL/pgSQL and PL/Python to
>> disallow return values that would end up being ignored, because the only
>> way a return value could arise is if user code explicit calls
>> RETURN/return. However, in Perl, the return value is the result of the
>> last statement, so prohibiting a return value would be very
>> inconvenient. (Don't know about Tcl.) So maybe the current behavior
>> makes sense. Documentation is surely needed.
> Tcl has the same approach as Perl: the return value of a proc is the
> same as the value of its last command. There's no such thing as a
> proc that doesn't return a value.
>
>

Right. We probably just need to document the behaviour here. I'd be
satisfied with that.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services