* Kevin Grittner (kgri...@ymail.com) wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > > In essence, make the relations work like PL/pgSQL > > variables do. If you squint a little, the new/old relation is a variable > > from the function's point of view, and a parameter from the > > planner/executor's point of view. It's just a variable/parameter that > > holds a set of tuples, instead of a single Datum. > > I don't have to squint that hard -- I've always been comfortable > with the definition of a table as a relation variable, and it's not > too big a stretch to expand that to a tuplestore. ;-) In fact, I > will be surprised if someone doesn't latch onto this to create a > new "declared temporary table" that only exists within the scope of > a compound statement (i.e., a BEGIN/END block). You would DECLARE > them just like you would a scalar variable in a PL, and they would > have the same scope. > > I'll take a look at doing this in the next couple days, and see > whether doing it that way is as easy as it seems on the face of it.
(not following this very closely, but saw this...)
Yes, please? :)
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
