Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE

2013/8/23 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>

> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/8/23 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > I think so is not good if some programming language functionality does
> one
> > in one context (functions) and does something else in second context
> > (procedures).
>
> It's not really different -- it means 'return if able'. Also there
> are a lot of things that would have to be different for other reasons
> especially transaction management. It's not reasonable to expect same
> behavior in function vs procedure context -- especially in terms of
> sending output to the caller.
>
> > On second hand, I am thinking so requirement PERFORM is good. A query
> that
> > does some, but result is ignored, is strange (and it can be a performance
> > fault), so we should not be too friendly in this use case.
>
> Completely disagree. There are many cases where this is *not*
> strange. For example:
> SELECT writing_func(some_col) FROM foo;
>

it is about a personal taste - if you prefer more verbose or less verbose
languages.

I feeling a PERFORM usage as something special and you example is nice
case, where I am think so PERFORM is good for verbosity.

Regards

Pavel

>
> merlin
>