Re: Anonymous code block with parameters
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Anonymous code block with parameters |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5417E267.4040801@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Anonymous code block with parameters (Kalyanov Dmitry <kalyanov.dmitry@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Anonymous code block with parameters
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/16/2014 09:38 AM, Kalyanov Dmitry wrote: > I'd like to propose support for IN and OUT parameters in 'DO' blocks. > > Currently, anonymous code blocks (DO statements) can not receive or > return parameters. > > I suggest: > > 1) Add a new clause to DO statement for specifying names, types, > directions and values of parameters: > > DO <code> [LANGUAGE <lang>] [USING (<arguments>)] > > where <arguments> has the same syntax as in > 'CREATE FUNCTION <name> (<arguments>)'. > > Example: > > do $$ begin z := x || y; end; $$ > language plpgsql > using > ( > x text = '1', > in out y int4 = 123, > out z text > ); > > 2) Values for IN and IN OUT parameters are specified using syntax for > default values of function arguments. > > 3) If DO statement has at least one of OUT or IN OUT parameters then it > returns one tuple containing values of OUT and IN OUT parameters. > > Do you think that this feature would be useful? I have a > proof-of-concept patch in progress that I intend to publish soon. There are two features here. One is to allow arguments to be passed to DO statements. The other is to allow a DO statement to return a result. Let's discuss them separately. 1) Passing arguments to a DO block can be useful feature, because it allows you to pass parameters to the DO block without injecting them into the string, which helps to avoid SQL injection attacks. I don't like the syntax you propose though. It doesn't actually let you pass the parameters out-of-band, so I don't really see the point. I think this needs to work with PREPARE/EXECUTE, and the protocol-level prepare/execute mechanism. Ie. something like this: PREPARE mydoblock (text, int4) AS DO $$ ... $$ EXECUTE mydoblock ('foo', 123); 2) Returning values from a DO block would also be handy. But I don't see why it should be restricted to OUT parameters. I'd suggest allowing a RETURNS clause, like in CREATE FUNCTION: DO $$ ... $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql RETURNS int4; or DO $$ ... $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql RETURNS TABLE (col1 text, col2 int4); - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: