| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 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>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(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 21:45:21 |
| Message-ID: | FC898158-D2F6-4DDC-A096-423FBC9BF4B2@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Aug 29, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I am thinking, so I propose a enough solution for you - when you use CTE for execution of VOID function, then result vill be VOID set, what we can accept as undefined result, and in this case a PERFORM should not be required. If CTE will return some result, then PERFORM should be required and PERFORM must to support CTE in all possible modes - updateable or not updateable queries.
If you can make PERFORM work with CTEs, that would be an improvement over the status quo. But I think there is no good reason not to let SELECT results be discarded, either. I know you think there are good reasons, but no one else in this thread is convince, AFAICT.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-08-29 21:48:26 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2013-08-29 21:44:47 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |