2008/5/21 Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> In my proposal I don't create any default variables. Result type is >>> only virtual - I don't need write it to system directory. I thing it's >>> better than using some specific predeclared type as RESULTTYPE OR >>> RESULTSET. >> >> How is this different from using OUT params and RETURNS SETOF RECORD ? > > *) you reference output variables via rowtype (r.var vs. var) > *) seems cleaner to separate in/out variables so add/drop function are > symmetric. > > Also, > What about: > > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION foo(m integer) > RETURNS TABLE (a integer, b integer) AS $$ > -- DECLARE r foo; -- make alias of r to foo optional > BEGIN > FOR i IN 1..m LOOP > foo.a := i; foo.b := i + 1; > [...] >
I though about it - but there I specify only one result variable and I directly specify name of variable to programmer. I thing so type specification is less limited. > or > RETURNS TABLE r(a integer, b integer) AS $$ > It's not ANSI compatible Pavel > merlin > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
