Darren Duncan <[email protected]> writes:
> Since Pg's FUNCTION already seems to take on both roles, so overloading the
> meaning of the FUNCTION keyword, like what a C function or a Perl sub does,
> where returning VOID means procedure, then what is being added by a distinct
> PROCEDURE?
You might care to go back and re-read some of the extensive prior
threads about this, but to my mind the main thing that would justify
inventing a separate PROCEDURE facility is if procedures were to execute
outside the transaction system, so that they could start and stop
transactions for themselves. This is unlike a function which
necessarily executes inside an already-running transaction. Of course
a lot of questions would need to be answered about error-handling
behavior and so forth, but that's a capability that a LOT of people
have asked for.
> Or is the VOID-returning FUNCTION going to be deprecated or
> discouraged at the same time?
Certainly not.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
