Re: proposal - plpgsql - FOR over unbound cursor
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal - plpgsql - FOR over unbound cursor |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 690044.1593626765@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | proposal - plpgsql - FOR over unbound cursor (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal - plpgsql - FOR over unbound cursor
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes: > Last week I played with dbms_sql extension and some patterns of usage > cursor in PL/SQL and PL/pgSQL. I found fact, so iteration over cursor (FOR > statement) doesn't support unbound cursors. I think so this limit is not > necessary. I guess I don't understand why we should add this. What does it do that can't be done better with a plain FOR-over-SELECT? The example you give of splitting an iteration into two loops doesn't inspire me to think it's useful; it looks more like encouraging awful programming practice. > This statement can open portal for bound cursor or can iterate > over before opened portal. When portal was opened inside FOR statement, > then it is closed inside this statement. And this definition seems quite inconsistent and error-prone. The point of a FOR loop, IMO, is to have a fairly self-contained definition of the set of iterations that will occur. This eliminates that property, leaving you with something no cleaner than a hand-built loop around a FETCH command. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: