Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE

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 21:31:55
Message-ID: FEBF326D-A4FE-4D38-B87F-DC14AB364E12@justatheory.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Aug 29, 2013, at 2:22 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> 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.

Well, in this thread, I believe you are the only person who feels that way. And this proposal still would not let PERFORM work with CTEs.

Best,

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-08-29 21:33:41 Re: Master-slave visibility order
Previous Message Ants Aasma 2013-08-29 21:22:49 Re: Master-slave visibility order