On Dec 3, 2007 3:31 PM, Pavel Stehule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > no. Your simplest version is historic relict and is available only in
> > > sql language. I am not sure, maybe in C language too.
> >
> > It is extremely useful to be able call functions in this way. I
> > really wish it were p
Hello
> >
> > no. Your simplest version is historic relict and is available only in
> > sql language. I am not sure, maybe in C language too.
>
> It is extremely useful to be able call functions in this way. I
> really wish it were possible to do this with pl/sql functions as
> well...
>
> merlin
On Nov 30, 2007 1:18 PM, Pavel Stehule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 30/11/2007, Cultural Sublimation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But still on that subject: is my version of get_items2 the simplest
> > that is possible in PL/pgSQL? It seems awfully verbose compared to
> > the SQL version...
>
On 30/11/2007, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pavel Stehule escribió:
> > On 30/11/2007, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Pavel Stehule escribió:
> > > > On 30/11/2007, Cultural Sublimation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > But still on that subject: is my vers
Pavel Stehule escribió:
> On 30/11/2007, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Pavel Stehule escribió:
> > > On 30/11/2007, Cultural Sublimation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > But still on that subject: is my version of get_items2 the simplest
> > > > that is possible in PL/pgSQL?
On 30/11/2007, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pavel Stehule escribió:
> > On 30/11/2007, Cultural Sublimation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > But still on that subject: is my version of get_items2 the simplest
> > > that is possible in PL/pgSQL? It seems awfully verbose compared to
Pavel Stehule escribió:
> On 30/11/2007, Cultural Sublimation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But still on that subject: is my version of get_items2 the simplest
> > that is possible in PL/pgSQL? It seems awfully verbose compared to
> > the SQL version...
>
> no. Your simplest version is histori
On 30/11/2007, Cultural Sublimation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would guess you're calling it like:
> >
> > SELECT get_items2();
> >
> > whereas, you should call set returning functions like:
> >
> > SELECT * FROM get_items2();
>
> Hi,
>
> Yeah, that was the problem -- thanks!
>
> But stil
> I would guess you're calling it like:
>
> SELECT get_items2();
>
> whereas, you should call set returning functions like:
>
> SELECT * FROM get_items2();
Hi,
Yeah, that was the problem -- thanks!
But still on that subject: is my version of get_items2 the simplest
that is possible in PL/
Hello
> Unfortunately it doesn't work! Postgresql complains that "set-valued
> function called in context that cannot accept a set". Anyway, what am
> I doing wrong, and what is the simplest way of translating get_items
> in PL/pgSQL?
>
> Thanks in advance!
> C.S.
try
select * from get_items2
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 09:09:28AM -0800, Cultural Sublimation wrote:
> Postgresql complains that "set-valued
> function called in context that cannot accept a set". Anyway, what am
> I doing wrong, and what is the simplest way of translating get_items
> in PL/pgSQL?
I would guess you're calling
Hi,
I am having trouble getting a really simple PL/pgSQL function to work.
I am beginning to wonder if there is not a bug somewhere, or if Postgresql's
type system is not broken. Anyway, suppose I have the following table and
type defined:
CREATE TABLE items
(
12 matches
Mail list logo
