Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes:
> I have to agree with Merlin. I've always thought the PERFORM thing was
> a wart we'd get around to removing eventually. In what way is it a feature?
I'd always assumed it was a PL/SQL compatibility thing, but a look in a
PL/SQL reference doesn't turn up any such statement. So far as I can see,
the situation in Oracle PL/SQL is:
* SELECT must have an INTO clause;
* there isn't any way to execute a SELECT and just discard the result.
Jan might remember more about his thought process here, but I'm thinking
that he copied the SELECT-must-have-INTO rule and then chose to invent
a new statement for the case of wanting to discard the result. I think
you could make an argument for that being good from an oversight-detection
standpoint, but it's not a really strong argument. Particularly in view
of the difficulty we'd have in supporting WITH ... PERFORM ... nicely,
it doesn't seem unreasonable to just allow SELECT-without-INTO.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
