Re: "stored procedures" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: "stored procedures"
Date
Msg-id 19196.1303485043@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "stored procedures"  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: "stored procedures"  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Re: "stored procedures"  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote:
>> wouldn't it be better if the current crop of language handlers
>> could run procedures without major changes?  C functions with SPI?
>> However it's internally implemented, the more userland mindspace
>> recovered for use of writing procedures the better off we are.
> +1

I'd like a pony, too.  Let's be perfectly clear about this: there is no
part of plpgsql that can run outside a transaction today, and probably
no part of the other PLs either, and changing that "without major
changes" is wishful thinking of the first order.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: On-the-fly index tuple deletion vs. hot_standby
Next
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: "stored procedures"