RE: why no stored procedures? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From roypgsqlgen@xemaps.com
Subject RE: why no stored procedures?
Date
Msg-id 013445F6BB17D4119959005004AAEA9A4E1EA6@SPIDERMAN
Whole thread Raw
In response to why no stored procedures?  (roypgsqlgen@xemaps.com)
List pgsql-general
Creating a C function to replace each stored proc is hardly a good solution.
Or is it?  Unfortunately my C skills are rusty at best.

I'm glad to hear that the postgresql developers are attempting to add the
ability to return result sets.  Does anyone have any idea how that is coming
along?  Also are they planning on creating stored procs at all to return
more than one parameter?

Roy.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Conway [mailto:joseph.conway@home.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 12:19 PM
> To: roypgsqlgen@xemaps.com; Doug McNaught
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] why no stored procedures?
>
> PostgreSQL also supports compiled C functions. This feature
> has significant
> performance advantages over run-of-the-mill stored procedures.
>
> -- Joe
>
>

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Oliver Elphick"
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug#108739: Tablenames should be compiled longer (fwd)
Next
From: Philip Crotwell
Date:
Subject: Re: LARGE db dump/restore for upgrade question