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

Re: patch: shared session variables

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch: shared session variables
Date: 2012-08-31 18:05:08
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Pavel, you didn't say what you think about the WITH FUNCTION proposal?
> I don't like it - this proposal is too "lispish" - it is not SQL

We're not doing lambda here, only extending a facility that we rely on
today. The function would be named, for one. I don't know what you mean
by SQL being lispish here, and I can't imagine why it would be something
to avoid.

>> And you didn't say how do you want to turn a utility statement into
>> something that is able to return a result set.
> if we support "real" procedures ala sybase procedures (MySQL, MSSQL..)
> - then we can return result with same mechanism - there are no
> significant difference between DO and CALL statements - you don't know
> what will be result type before you call it.

Currently we don't have CALL, and we have DO which is not a query but a
utility statement. Are you proposing to implement CALL? What would be
the difference between making DO a query and having CALL?

Dimitri Fontaine     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2012-08-31 18:23:28
Subject: Re: _USE_32BIT_TIME_T Patch
Previous:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2012-08-31 17:32:16
Subject: Re: Cascading replication and recovery_target_timeline='latest'

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