| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Date: | 2013-08-29 21:40:24 |
| Message-ID: | 521FBFC8.50802@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/29/2013 02:22 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Still I don't think so correct solution is enabling a unbound SELECTs, but
> correct is a fix a PERFORM and remove a necessity to use a PERFORM for call
> of VOID functions.
You have yet to supply any arguments which support this position.
Several people have pointed out that requiring PERFORM needlessly makes
life hard for PL/pgSQL programmers, especially new ones. You have not
given us any benefit it supplies in return.
And no, I don't accept the idea that we might someday have some kind of
conflicting syntax for stored procedures which nobody is working on as a
valid argument.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-08-29 21:41:01 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-08-29 21:37:31 | Re: Variadic aggregates vs. project policy |