Re: Simple function question
От | Sean Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Simple function question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 31914AD8-2759-11D9-8C43-000A95D7BA10@mail.nih.gov обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Simple function question (Sean Davis <sdavis2@mail.nih.gov>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
On Oct 26, 2004, at 9:49 AM, Sean Davis wrote: >> >> You could return SETOF RECORD but then your queries will need to >> provide a column definition list. Another way would be to create >> a custom type that describes a result record and return SETOF that >> type. But before you do any of this, perhaps you should think about >> whether you really need a function at all, or whether you can use >> views and WHERE clauses. >> > > Michael, > > Thanks for the reply. The reason all of this comes up is that I have > an application in which the user can create "sets" of IDs. I then > want to be able to do logical operations on the sets of IDs and then > return the database objects based on the ID's in those sets. I tried > the function version using "ANY" and the simple query using "IN" and > found an order of magnitude difference in speed (IN is faster). So, > it appears that using views and where clauses is the way to go here. > One last question--is there a limit to the length of a SQL query (in > terms of characters), as some of these sets could be very large (up to > 40000 integers)? > Sorry. Answered (partially) my own question. max_expr_depth is set to 10000 as default on my MacOS installation (7.4.3). Sean
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: