| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Date: | 2013-08-20 13:13:52 |
| Message-ID: | 3F071179-7CE4-4E07-8D8A-467448BAF581@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Aug 20, 2013, at 3:05 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> When you would to ignore result, then you should to use a PERFORM - actually, it is limited now and should be fixed. Have no problem with it.
Glad to have you on board. :-)
> I don't would to enable a free unbound statement that returns result.
I have no pony in that race. I think it is useful, though I prefer to unit test things enough that I would be fine without it.
But even without it, there may be times when I want to discard a result in a function that *does* return a value -- likely a different value. So there needs to be a way to distinguish statements that should return a value and those that do not.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-08-20 13:18:58 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-08-20 13:13:50 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]) |