Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRDYUMq2kgW5a+yJA2i_NoOESFK9c0-6do88cAo-ZdtWWA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>)
Responses Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view



2013/8/20 David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com>
On Aug 20, 2013, at 3:05 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:

> When you would to ignore result, then you should to use a PERFORM - actually, it is limited now and should be fixed. Have no problem with it.

Glad to have you on board. :-)

> I don't would to enable a free unbound statement that returns result.

I have no pony in that race. I think it is useful, though I prefer to unit test things enough that I would be fine without it.

But even without it, there may be times when I want to discard a result in a function that *does* return a value -- likely a different value. So there needs to be a way to distinguish statements that should return a value and those that do not.

can you show some examples, please

Pavel


Best,

David


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review])