On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 5:43 PM Tom Mercha wrote:
> I am still a bit of a novice with PostgreSQL internals. Could you please
> provide some more detail on your comment regarding affecting permanent
> session state?
I was not referring to internals.
BEGIN;
CREATE TEMP TABLE tempdo (id int);
DO $
On 10/07/2019 02:31, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 5:23 PM Tom Mercha wrote:
>
>>
>> I understand that you never wrote any PL handler but was just thinking
>> about this functionality as a follow-up to our conversation. I was just
>> wondering whether anonymous DO blocks *must
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 5:23 PM Tom Mercha wrote:
>
> I understand that you never wrote any PL handler but was just thinking
> about this functionality as a follow-up to our conversation. I was just
> wondering whether anonymous DO blocks *must* return void or not?
>
> The docs for DO say it is a
On 09/07/2019 23:22, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 11:06:38PM +, Tom Mercha wrote:
>> On 06/07/2019 00:06, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> First of all, it's pretty difficult to follow the discussion when it's
>>> not clear what's the original message and what's the response. E-mail
>>>
On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 11:06:38PM +, Tom Mercha wrote:
On 06/07/2019 00:06, Tomas Vondra wrote:
First of all, it's pretty difficult to follow the discussion when it's
not clear what's the original message and what's the response. E-mail
clients generally indent the original message with '>'
On 06/07/2019 00:06, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> First of all, it's pretty difficult to follow the discussion when it's
> not clear what's the original message and what's the response. E-mail
> clients generally indent the original message with '>' or someting like
> that, but your client does not do tha
First of all, it's pretty difficult to follow the discussion when it's
not clear what's the original message and what's the response. E-mail
clients generally indent the original message with '>' or someting like
that, but your client does not do that (which is pretty silly). And
copying the messa
nting out this direction! I think I will indeed adopt this
approach especially if directly extending PostgreSQL grammar would be difficult.
Regards
Tom
From: Tomas Vondra
Sent: 05 July 2019 20:48
To: Tom Mercha
Cc: pgsql-hack...@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Extendin
On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 07:55:15AM +, Tom Mercha wrote:
Dear Hackers
I am interested in implementing my own Domain Specific Language (DSL)
using PostgreSQL internals. Originally, the plan was not to use
PostgreSQL and I had developed a grammar and used ANTLRv4 for parser
work and general ear
