Re: Seeking Clarification on Function Definitions in PostgreSQL Extensions - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ron Johnson
Subject Re: Seeking Clarification on Function Definitions in PostgreSQL Extensions
Date
Msg-id CANzqJaB_E-wZn3Z91amPN9KCAXfm7JKY08dnuVY2r9mWys-4Bg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Seeking Clarification on Function Definitions in PostgreSQL Extensions  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Seeking Clarification on Function Definitions in PostgreSQL Extensions
List pgsql-general
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 2:37 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 1:57 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com> wrote:

But I stand by returning OUT params and records at the same time.

You mean you dislike adding the optional returns clause when output parameters exist? 

Correct.  It breaks the distinction between function and procedure.

How so?

The two distinctions are functions can produce sets while procedures get transaction control.

They both can produce a single multi-column output record.  The presence or absence of the optional return clause on a function definition doesn’t change that fact.

"A function returns a value*, but a procedure does not."

*In the case of SQL, "value" might be a set.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: HISTIGNORE in psql
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Seeking Clarification on Function Definitions in PostgreSQL Extensions