"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 5:18 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> v2 attached.
> Thank you. That reads much better, aside from maybe a couple of missing
> commas.
> - Certain function attributes such as strictness don't apply to
> + Certain function attributes, such as
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 5:18 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Would it be better
> >> to turn the para into a bulleted list, which we could introduce with
> >> "The key differences are:" ?
>
> > Indeed, reworking the rest of
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Would it be better
>> to turn the para into a bulleted list, which we could introduce with
>> "The key differences are:" ?
> Indeed, reworking the rest of the paragraph around that introduction would
> be much better
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I very strongly dislike the existing "The difference ..." wording,
> because it implies that that's the only difference, which is immediately
> belied by the rest.
Agreed!
> Would it be better
> to turn the para into a bulleted list, which we c
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:21 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> "David G. Johnston" writes:
>>> Instead of "The difference" or "One difference" I would suggest:
>>> "However, a procedure does not return a value, so there is no return type
>>> declaration; though a procedure can d
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:21 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > The omission of the "OUT" parameter mode seems intentional since at
> present
> > our procedures do not support OUT mode parameters.
>
> Um, I just created one. I think this *used* to be true, and this bit of
> the
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> The omission of the "OUT" parameter mode seems intentional since at present
> our procedures do not support OUT mode parameters.
Um, I just created one. I think this *used* to be true, and this bit of
the docs didn't get fixed. If I back-patch this, I'll have to re
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 1:57 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 9:41 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Guyren Howe writes:
> >>> This seems like an important consideration. I've spent 10 minutes
> >>> searching the documentation for PG 11 and can't find where it i
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 9:41 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Guyren Howe writes:
>>> This seems like an important consideration. I've spent 10 minutes
>>> searching the documentation for PG 11 and can't find where it is
>>> documented. Perhaps it should be made more prominent?
@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Need help with clarification on stored procedure support in
PostGreSQL database
This seems like an important consideration. I’ve spent 10 minutes searching the
documentation for PG 11 and can’t find where it is documented. Perhaps it
should be made more prominent?
On
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 9:41 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Guyren Howe writes:
> > This seems like an important consideration. I’ve spent 10 minutes
> searching the documentation for PG 11 and can’t find where it is
> documented. Perhaps it should be made more prominent?
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/doc
I think that’s burying the lede a bit. Still, unless the “Extending SQL
Section” acquired an Overview section, I’m not sure where else you’d put it.
On Mar 8, 2021, 20:41 -0800, Tom Lane , wrote:
> Guyren Howe writes:
> > This seems like an important consideration. I’ve spent 10 minutes searching
Guyren Howe writes:
> This seems like an important consideration. I’ve spent 10 minutes searching
> the documentation for PG 11 and can’t find where it is documented. Perhaps it
> should be made more prominent?
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/xproc.html
regards,
This seems like an important consideration. I’ve spent 10 minutes searching the
documentation for PG 11 and can’t find where it is documented. Perhaps it
should be made more prominent?
On Mar 8, 2021, 16:53 -0800, raf , wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 06:31:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > raf
On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 06:31:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> raf writes:
> > Is there any important different between a stored procedure and
> > a stored function that returns void? I've been using functions
> > for everything but calling them procedures in my head (even though
> > most of them d
raf writes:
> Is there any important different between a stored procedure and
> a stored function that returns void? I've been using functions
> for everything but calling them procedures in my head (even though
> most of them do return a value or result set).
A procedure can commit or rollback a
On Sun, Mar 07, 2021 at 11:01:07AM -0800, Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> On 3/7/21 10:48 AM, Bysani, Ram wrote:
> > PostgreSQL version: 11.11
> >
> > Operating system: Linux 64 bit
> >
> > Description:
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > We have found posts on several forums that Stored Procedures are not
>
On 3/7/21 10:48 AM, Bysani, Ram wrote:
PostgreSQL version: 11.11
Operating system: Linux 64 bit
Description:
Greetings
We have found posts on several forums that Stored Procedures are not
supported in PostGreSQL databasel.
We looked at the documentation but it is not clear when Stored Pr
On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 11:49 AM Bysani, Ram wrote:
> Please provide details / clarify if Stored Procedures are available in
> versions 11.x, 12.x, 13.x Please also confirm when it was actually added.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/
>
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-createprocedur
PostgreSQL version: 11.11
Operating system: Linux 64 bit
Description:
Greetings
We have found posts on several forums that Stored Procedures are not supported
in PostGreSQL databasel.
We looked at the documentation but it is not clear when Stored Procedure
support was added. We are awa
20 matches
Mail list logo
