Re: PL/pgSQL support to define multi variables once
| От | David Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: PL/pgSQL support to define multi variables once |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwb5b2H-RxF0+3nxLMjJq3Rz1kojMjRSBhKUt3xW9N3eag@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: PL/pgSQL support to define multi variables once (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: PL/pgSQL support to define multi variables once
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> Tom Lane-2 wrote
>> At the very least I think we should stay away from this syntax until
>> the SQL committee understand it better than they evidently do today.
>> I don't want to implement it and then get caught by a future
>> clarification that resolves the issue differently than we did.
> Its not quite as unclear as you make it out to be:
Yes it is.
Not withstanding the decision making of the SQL committee I was rejecting as inconsistent:
SET random_1 = 0;
SET random_2 = 0;
SET random_3 = random(1234);
The ambiguity regarding re-execute or copy still remains.
That's not the reading I want, and it's not the reading you want either,
but there is nothing in the existing text that justifies single
evaluation. So I think we'd be well advised to sit on our hands until
the committee clarifies that. It's not like there is some urgent reason
to have this feature.
Agreed.
I don't suppose there is any support or prohibition on the :
one,two,three integer := generate_series(1,3);
interpretation...not that I can actually come up with a good use case that wouldn't be better implemented via a loop in the main body.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: