Re: Implementing "thick"/"fat" databases

From: Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Karl Nack <karlnack(at)futurityinc(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Implementing "thick"/"fat" databases
Date: 2011-07-23 21:29:15
Message-ID: CAKt_ZfvqT_YFumYmnZWcLR9R3Gh-TE7+CWnu+OzREPa0FS2Uow@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 1:32 PM, David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Now for the application, you can create an API that is semantically
>> clearer.  But PostgreSQL doesn't provide an easy way of calling
>> procedures of this sort out of select/update/insert statements and
>> select is the only way to do this.
>>
>>
>
> A semantically accurate way to run "procedures" is:
>
> DO $$ BEGIN PERFORM function(); END $$;
>
> It would be nice if you could use PERFORM outside of plpgsql...
>
> Now, this is not standard SQL but it does convey the desired semantics.  That said, proper function naming can convey similar semantic information as well.

The other option (one we try to follow in LedgerSMB) is to always make
the procedure return useful information. So you are essentially
calling a procedure and selecting the result for further use by your
application.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karl Nack 2011-07-23 22:27:33 Re: Implementing "thick"/"fat" databases
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2011-07-23 20:36:44 Re: weird table sizes