Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: "stored procedures"

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "stored procedures"
Date: 2011-04-21 15:40:26
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi Peter

2011/4/21 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
> So the topic of "real" "stored procedures" came up again.  Meaning a
> function-like object that executes outside of a regular transaction,
> with the ability to start and stop SQL transactions itself.
> I would like to collect some specs on this feature.  So does anyone have
> links to documentation of existing implementations, or their own spec
> writeup?  A lot of people appear to have a very clear idea of this
> concept in their own head, so let's start collecting those.

I had a patch for "transactional" procedures, but this is lost :(

What I (We) expect:

Very important points:
1. possible explicit transaction controlling - not only subtransactions
2. correct or usual behave of OUT parameters (important for JDBC people)
*** attention: overloading is related to OUT parameters too ***

Not necessary but nice:
3. Support for multirecordset and RETURN_STATUS variable
(RETURN_STATUS is defined by ANSI)



> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-04-21 15:43:16
Subject: Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-04-21 15:39:56
Subject: Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group