From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, 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: | 2010-09-04 14:16:15 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimgA-7q=3Ek6rfP6ONPYwwF6UYXgHp0=YXx-YKF@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Also as mentioned upthread there are effective workarounds if you poke
>> around a bit. This is a FAQ, and there are about 3-4 solid methods
>> (if you search the archives) that cover most problems you would be
>> looking at multiple results sets to solve. I suppose this is why
>> there hasn't been more of an effort to do this earlier. People asking
>> for this are typically dispossessed SQL server developers who haven't
>> quite gotten used to the postgres way of things. Not that proper
>> stored procedures wouldn't be great -- they would be -- but they are
>> not the only way to solve these types of problems.
>
> I had a prototype that can do multirecordset. But implementation of
> non transact procedures needs a hundreds hours of work:
>
> * outer SPI
> * parametrization for non planner statements - for CALL statement
> * explicit transaction control for procedures.
> * client API support for multirecordset
> * better support for OUT variables.
Curious: is mulitset handling as you see it supported by the current
v3 protocol?
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-09-04 15:00:55 | Re: returning multiple result sets from a stored procedure |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-09-04 14:10:14 | Re: returning multiple result sets from a stored procedure |