Re: [HACKERS] SQL procedures - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: [HACKERS] SQL procedures
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRC3yfg0tYikCyooW8KvxorWrFOnNDcc-ZFsA4fSWMD_Gg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] SQL procedures  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


2018-01-02 17:47 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I agree that we need this, but using prorettype = InvalidOid to do it
> might not be the best way, because it only works for procedures that
> don't return anything.  If a procedure could return, say, an integer,

Good point, because that is possible in some other systems, and so
somebody is going to ask for it at some point.

> Anyway, I think it would be better to invent an explicit way to
> represent whether something is a procedure rather than relying on
> overloading prorettype to tell us.

+1 --- seems like a new bool column is the thing.  Or may we should merge
"proisprocedure" with proisagg and proiswindow into an enum prokind?
Although that would break some existing client-side code.

+1

Pavel


PS: I still strongly disagree with allowing prorettype to be zero.

                        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Add default role 'pg_access_server_files'
Next
From: Marco Nenciarini
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Logical decoding of TRUNCATE