Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2
От | Oskari Saarenmaa |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 540B4588.1060505@ohmu.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2 (Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>) |
Ответы |
Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
06.09.2014 19:12, Jan Wieck kirjoitti: > On 09/06/2014 04:21 AM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: >> We wrap these things into (sometimes) simple-looking function so that >> none of the application developers ever run any SQL. We define an >> interface between the application and the database, and that interface >> is implemented using PL/PgSQL functions. Sure, sometimes one function >> will just fire off a single UPDATE .. RETURNING, or a SELECT, but that >> doesn't matter. The trick is to be consistent everywhere. > > There is precisely your root problem. Instead of educating your > application developers on how to properly use a relational database > system, you try to make it foolproof. There are also other reasons to wrap everything in functions, for example sharding using pl/proxy which by the way always throws an error if a SELECT didn't match exactly one row and the function wasn't declared returning 'SETOF' (although it currently doesn't set any sqlstate for these errors making it a bit difficult to properly catch them.) Anyway, I think the discussed feature to make select, update and delete throw an error if they returned or modified <> 1 row would be more useful as an extension of the basic sql statements instead of a plpgsql (2) only feature to make it possible to use it from other languages and outside functions. / Oskari
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: