Thread: question about 8.1 and stored procedures
Hi, I read in a article/interview on http://madpenguin.org/cms/html/62/3677.html that work was being done on improving/adding support for sql standard compliant stored procs/functions Does anyone know exactly what that means? Does it mean that Postgres will have stored procs that can have input and output params? Thanks, Tony
Tony Caduto wrote: > Hi, > I read in a article/interview on http://madpenguin.org/cms/html/62/3677.html > that work was being done on improving/adding support for sql standard > compliant stored procs/functions > > Does anyone know exactly what that means? > > Does it mean that Postgres will have stored procs that can have input > and output params? Yes. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tony Caduto wrote: >> Hi, >> I read in a article/interview on http://madpenguin.org/cms/html/62/3677.html >> that work was being done on improving/adding support for sql standard >> compliant stored procs/functions >> >> Does anyone know exactly what that means? >> >> Does it mean that Postgres will have stored procs that can have input >> and output params? > > Yes. I think that keyword here is 'sql standard compliant', not stored procedures itself, because we have them for a long time and with support of dozen languages. Or I miss something ? > > Regards, Oleg _____________________________________________________________ Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
Oleg Bartunov wrote: > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> Tony Caduto wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I read in a article/interview on >>> http://madpenguin.org/cms/html/62/3677.html >>> that work was being done on improving/adding support for sql standard >>> compliant stored procs/functions >>> >>> Does anyone know exactly what that means? >>> >>> Does it mean that Postgres will have stored procs that can have input >>> and output params? >> >> >> Yes. > > > I think that keyword here is 'sql standard compliant', not stored > procedures > itself, because we have them for a long time and with support of dozen > languages. Or I miss something ? What I read from this is, when will PostgreSQL have stored procedures like Oracle. Thus the IN/OUT parameter statement. My understanding is that 8.1 will have a much more mature implementation of stored procedures versus UDFs (Which we have had forever). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > >> >> > > Regards, > Oleg > _____________________________________________________________ > Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, > Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) > Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ > phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Oleg Bartunov wrote: > >> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> >>> Tony Caduto wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> I read in a article/interview on >>>> http://madpenguin.org/cms/html/62/3677.html >>>> that work was being done on improving/adding support for sql standard >>>> compliant stored procs/functions >>>> >>>> Does anyone know exactly what that means? >>>> >>>> Does it mean that Postgres will have stored procs that can have input >>>> and output params? >>> >>> >>> Yes. >> >> >> I think that keyword here is 'sql standard compliant', not stored >> procedures >> itself, because we have them for a long time and with support of dozen >> languages. Or I miss something ? > > What I read from this is, when will PostgreSQL have stored procedures like > Oracle. Thus the IN/OUT parameter statement. I mean original Josh's interview "An example of what people are working on right now is SQL standard compliant stored procedures. We have procedures now, but they're not compliant with the standard syntax." Nothing about Oracle unless Oracle has standard compliant stored procedures. > > My understanding is that 8.1 will have a much more mature implementation of > stored procedures versus UDFs (Which we have had forever). What's the difference between UDF and stored procedure ? > > Sincerely, > > Joshua D. Drake > > > > > >> >> >>> >>> >> >> Regards, >> Oleg >> _____________________________________________________________ >> Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, >> Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) >> Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ >> phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83 >> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > > > > Regards, Oleg _____________________________________________________________ Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
>> >> My understanding is that 8.1 will have a much more mature >> implementation of >> stored procedures versus UDFs (Which we have had forever). > > > What's the difference between UDF and stored procedure ? > Here are a couple of GGIYF references: http://builder.com.com/5100-6388-1045463.html http://blogs.pingpoet.com/vbguru/archive/2004/04/29/535.aspx They are similar but they offer different functionality. At least in the sense of the other databases. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Joshua D. Drake >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Oleg >>> _____________________________________________________________ >>> Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, >>> Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) >>> Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ >>> phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83 >>> >>> ---------------------------(end of >>> broadcast)--------------------------- >>> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster >> >> >> >> >> > > Regards, > Oleg > _____________________________________________________________ > Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, > Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) > Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ > phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83 -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >>> >>> My understanding is that 8.1 will have a much more mature implementation >>> of >>> stored procedures versus UDFs (Which we have had forever). >> >> >> What's the difference between UDF and stored procedure ? >> > Here are a couple of GGIYF references: > > http://builder.com.com/5100-6388-1045463.html > http://blogs.pingpoet.com/vbguru/archive/2004/04/29/535.aspx > > They are similar but they offer different functionality. At least in > the sense of the other databases. > Hmm, the only real difference I see - is that SP are precompiled. I think we should clearly outline what is SP and what is UDF and do we are working on SP or just improving and extending our functions. > Sincerely, > > Joshua D. Drake > > > > > > >> >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Joshua D. Drake >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Oleg >>>> _____________________________________________________________ >>>> Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, >>>> Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) >>>> Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ >>>> phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83 >>>> >>>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >>>> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> Regards, >> Oleg >> _____________________________________________________________ >> Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, >> Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) >> Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ >> phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83 > > > > Regards, Oleg _____________________________________________________________ Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
> Hmm, the only real difference I see - is that SP are precompiled.
> I think we should clearly outline what is SP and what is UDF and do we
> are working on SP or just improving and extending our functions.
AFAIR, the only person who's actually stated any intention to work on
this for 8.1 was me, and what I intend to do is just enough to support
OUT and INOUT parameters in plpgsql. This is mostly because Red Hat
wants to run some test suites that require those capabilities.
There was some discussion of other ideas in the pgsql-hackers list
a few weeks ago (see the archives) but I don't think anyone is stepping
up to the plate to do them.
regards, tom lane
Oleg Bartunov wrote: > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> >>>> >>>> My understanding is that 8.1 will have a much more mature >>>> implementation of >>>> stored procedures versus UDFs (Which we have had forever). >>> >>> >>> >>> What's the difference between UDF and stored procedure ? >>> >> Here are a couple of GGIYF references: >> >> http://builder.com.com/5100-6388-1045463.html >> http://blogs.pingpoet.com/vbguru/archive/2004/04/29/535.aspx >> >> They are similar but they offer different functionality. At least in >> the sense of the other databases. >> > > Hmm, the only real difference I see - is that SP are precompiled. > I think we should clearly outline what is SP and what is UDF and do we > are working on SP or just improving and extending our functions. > I always thought that the big difference was that a SP can start and end top level transactions whereas UDFs must execute within the scope of a transaction started by the caller. The above article doesn't mention this at all. Regards, Thomas Hallgren