Section "43.7. Cursors” in the PL/pgSQL chapter of the doc
(www.postgresql.org/docs/current/plpgsql-cursors.html#PLPGSQL-CURSOR-DECLARATIONS)starts with this:
«
Rather than executing a whole query at once, it is possible to set up a cursor that encapsulates the query, and then
readthe query result a few rows at a time. One reason for doing this is to avoid memory overrun when the result
containsa large number of rows. (However, PL/pgSQL users do not normally need to worry about that, since FOR loops
automaticallyuse a cursor internally to avoid memory problems.) A more interesting usage is to return a reference to a
cursorthat a function has created, allowing the caller to read the rows. This provides an efficient way to return large
rowsets from functions.
»
On its face, it seems to make sense. And I’ve written a few proof-of-concept tests. For example, I wrote a “security
definer”function that's owned by a role that can select from the relevant table(s) that returns refcursor. And I called
itfrom a subprogram that's owned by a role that cannot select from the relevant table(s) to loop through the rows. But
Ican't convince myself that this division of labor is useful. And especially I can't convince myself that the
"pipeling"capability is relevant in a three-tier app with a stateless browser UI. Here, the paradigm has the
client-sideapp checking out a connection from the pool, generating the entire response to the end-user's request,
releasingthe connection, and sending the response back to the browser. This paradigm isn't consistent with allowing the
enduser to navigate forwards and backwards in a scrollable cursor that is somehow held in its open state in in the
severby the the middle tier client on behalf of a browser session that comes back time and again to its dedicated
middletier client and thence yo its dedicated database server session. (Anyway, without anything like Oracle PL/SQL's
packages,you have no mechanism to hold the opened cursor variable between successive server calls.)
Is it fair to say that the PL/pgSQL refcursor is useful, at best, only in very special use-cases?
