Re: Stored procedures and out parameters

From: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jonathan(dot)katz(at)excoventures(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shay Rojansky <roji(at)roji(dot)org>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Stored procedures and out parameters
Date: 2018-08-15 11:54:32
Message-ID: E48E9CE6-8043-4CDF-8D04-47D6C2C4811C@excoventures.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> On Aug 14, 2018, at 1:30 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-08-12 08:51:28 +0100, Shay Rojansky wrote:
>> Peter, Tom,
>>
>> Would it be possible for you to review the following two questions? Some
>> assertions have been made in this thread about the new stored procedures
>> (support for dynamic and multiple resultsets) whose compatibility with the
>> current PostgreSQL protocol are unclear to me as a client driver
>> maintainer... Some clarification would really help.
>
> I've not yet discussed this with the rest of the RMT, but to me it
> sounds like we should treat this an open item for the release. We
> shouldn't have the wire protocol do something nonsensical and then do
> something different in the next release.

The RMT has now discussed and concluded that we should treat this
as an open item. It has been added to the list.

Jonathan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2018-08-15 12:21:45 Re: Fix quadratic performance of regexp match/split functions
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-08-15 11:46:47 Re: garbage variable in GNUmakefile.in