We, that is ecpg, will need BEGIN and END to include blocks of Pl/pgSQL.
I think this can be modelled after ORACLE's PL/SQL. in your embedded SQL
code you say:
...
exec sql begin;
<some PL/SQL code, for instance the call of a stored
procedure>
exec sql end;
...
And I'd really like to call a stored procedure from my C program.
Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | topystem Systemhaus GmbH
meskes@topsystem.de | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
meskes@debian.org | 52146 Wuerselen
Go SF49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44
> ----------
> From: sferac@bo.nettuno.it[SMTP:sferac@bo.nettuno.it]
> Sent: Freitag, 13. März 1998 18:28
> To: Zeugswetter Andreas
> Cc: 'Michael Meskes'; 'pgsql-hackers@hub.org'
> Subject: Re: AW: [HACKERS] Begin statement again
>
> On Fri, 13 Mar 1998, Zeugswetter Andreas wrote:
>
> > I think we should depreciate the BEGIN/END keywords in SQL to allow
> them
> > to be used for the new PL/SQL. So definitely leave them out of ecpg
> now.
> > Only accept BEGIN WORK and BEGIN TRANSACTION. (do a sequence of
> commit work; begin work)
>
> Apologies for intrusion.
>
> I think we don't need BEGIN/END at all, these statements aren't SQL
> standard.
> END is an alias for COMMIT.
> (why do we need two statements to do the same thing?).
>
> from man commit:
> "...
> This commands commits the current transaction. All
> changes made by the transaction become visible to others
> and are guaranteed to be durable if a crash occurs.
> COMMIT is functionally equivalent to the END command"
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> from man begin:
> "...
> commands commits the current transaction. All
> changes made by the transaction become visible to others
> and are guaranteed to be durable if a crash occurs."
>
> and BEGIN should be changed to SQL standard SET TRANSACTION statement.
> -------
> PS:
> I think PL/pgSQL is an eccellent idea. Go for it.
> Ciao,
> Jose'
>
>
