On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 05:28:42PM -0600, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> David,
>
> I agree with your idea. That seems like it would be somewhat easy to
> implement and would do exactly what I would need. Anyone else have
> ideas or thoughts along this line?
Seeing as EXECUTE IMMEDIATE is already used, so how about PERFORM
IMMEDIATE? I also like the idea of functions whose scope is settable.
Something like this:
CREATE [OR REPLACE] [ TRANSACTION | SESSION ] FUNCTION ...
Cheers,
D
>
> David Fetter wrote:
>
> >On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 11:44:23AM -0600, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hey everyone,
> >>
> >>In addition to package support in plpgsql, it would be really handy
> >>to have inline plpgsql. Likewise, I think there are others who feel
> >>this way as-well.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Why yes, there are. :)
> >
> >
> >
> >>Years ago, Oracle merged PL/SQL with their normal SQL parser which
> >>allowed for inline PL/SQL. They did this because it was difficult
> >>to maintain two separate parsers. While this worked great for
> >>Oracle, it probably wouldn't really work as well for PostgreSQL
> >>because pgsql supports multiple procedural languages.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I proposed a syntax for this awhile back. I haven't found it in the
> >archives, but it goes like this:
> >
> >EXECUTE IMMEDIATE $$
> > function body here
> >$$
> >LANGUAGE plfoo;
> >
> >Similarly, a CREATE TEMPORARY FUNCTION could be quite handy.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >D
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
