2012/7/10 Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr>: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: >>>> WITH FUNCTION foo(param list) returns rettype language foo AS ( >>>> definition here >>>> ) >>>> <query using foo() here>; >>> >>> I like this idea. This gets rid of both the "how to pass parameters" >>> and the "how to return results" issues that exist with DO, as well as >>> assorted implementation problems that you hinted at by asking whether >>> DO would still be a utility command. >> >> what is use case for this statement? > > It's the DO block idea turned into a query rather than a utility > command: you can now run a function that does not exists in the catalogs > *and* feed it parameters (either from the client, as literals in the > main query, or from the query itself) *and* you get a query result our > of it. > > I'm not sure I can understand the difference between that and the use > case for which you want to implement DO blocks with parameters.
this is similar to temporary functions - you need some temporary name - it is insert to pg_proc, and you have to solve possible conflicts. > > Regards, > -- > Dimitri Fontaine > http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
