On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:33:19AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > James Mansion wrote: > > Josh Berkus wrote: > >> Not only would they be generally useful for SP programming, but > >> multisets would eliminate one of the big hurdles in re-writing > >> T-SQL stored procedures in PG, and thus make it easier to port > >> from SQL Server. You don't hear a lot of demand for multisets on > >> the mailing lists because we're not getting those SQL Server / > >> Sybase crossovers now. > >> > > Its true that multiple result sets are a big deal with T-SQL > > programming: but I think you'll also need to provide a way for the > > locking model to behave in a similar way and also very importantly > > to be able to emulate the after-statement triggers view of new and > > old images. > > I don't think we need to (or, for that matter, are able to) change > the locking model, but the NEW and OLD views of for-statement > triggers should be just a SMOP.
Having NEW and OLD views of per-statement triggers would be a Very Nice Feature(TM) independent of stored procedures. For one thing, it would make certain kinds of replication trivial. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
