Re: Procedure support improvements

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 04:01, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> >>
> >> I'm sure that new users who start using PostgreSQL 11+, and those
> >> migrating from other DBMSs, would have that kind of viewpoint. They'd
> >> naturally be creating stored procedures for various complex reusable
> >> processing (that does not necessarily need to commit/rollback
> >> transactions within the procedure).
> >
> >
> > I presume you have use cases that do not do transactions ?
> >
>
> What I was getting at here is that stored procedures can participate
> in transactions, without having to control them (i.e. without issuing
> COMMIT/ROLLBACK themselves).
> For example, a client JDBC-based application might start a transaction
> (auto-commit=FALSE), and invoke a couple of stored procedures as part
> of the transaction, and then COMMIT the transaction (or ROLLBACK if an
> exception is raised). The stored procedures in this case might
> UPDATE/INSERT records; they are participating in the transaction, but
> not explicitly controlling it.
>

Yes, I do understand that. My issue is that without autonomous transactions
procedures are just functions with a different syntax.

As I said, I'd entertain a connection parameter that switched the CALL to
call procedures but ideally you'd complain to the server folks to make
Procedures useful.

Dave Cramer

davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com
www.postgresintl.com