Re: why can't plpgsql return a row-expression? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Asif Rehman
Subject Re: why can't plpgsql return a row-expression?
Date
Msg-id CAAuGLxWpEDfwAE6DAJMF7SxEwFUsA0f68P07RetBbpf_FSaShA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: why can't plpgsql return a row-expression?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: why can't plpgsql return a row-expression?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

I have tried to solve this issue. Please see the attached patch. 

With this patch, any expression is allowed in the return statement. For any invalid expression an error is generated without doing any special handling.
When a row expression is used in the return statement then the resultant tuple will have rowtype in a single column that needed to be extracted. Hence I have handled that case in exec_stmt_return().

any comments/suggestions?

Regards,
--Asif

On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2012/10/8 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> Laziness, probably.  Feel free to have at it.

> I wrote patch some years ago. It was rejected from performance reasons
> - because every row had to be casted to resulted type.

I don't recall that patch in any detail, but it's not apparent to me
that an extra cast step *must* be required to implement this.  In the
cases that are supported now, surely we could notice that no additional
work is required.

It's also worth commenting that if we were to switch the storage of
composite-type plpgsql variables to HeapTuple, as has been suggested
here for other reasons, the performance tradeoffs in this area would
likely change completely anyway.

                        regards, tom lane


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Markus Wanner
Date:
Subject: Re: Enabling Checksums
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL