On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 05:28:42PM -0600, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > David, > > I agree with your idea. That seems like it would be somewhat easy to > implement and would do exactly what I would need. Anyone else have > ideas or thoughts along this line?
Seeing as EXECUTE IMMEDIATE is already used, so how about PERFORM IMMEDIATE? I also like the idea of functions whose scope is settable. Something like this: CREATE [OR REPLACE] [ TRANSACTION | SESSION ] FUNCTION ... Cheers, D > > David Fetter wrote: > > >On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 11:44:23AM -0600, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > > > > > >>Hey everyone, > >> > >>In addition to package support in plpgsql, it would be really handy > >>to have inline plpgsql. Likewise, I think there are others who feel > >>this way as-well. > >> > >> > > > >Why yes, there are. :) > > > > > > > >>Years ago, Oracle merged PL/SQL with their normal SQL parser which > >>allowed for inline PL/SQL. They did this because it was difficult > >>to maintain two separate parsers. While this worked great for > >>Oracle, it probably wouldn't really work as well for PostgreSQL > >>because pgsql supports multiple procedural languages. > >> > >> > > > >I proposed a syntax for this awhile back. I haven't found it in the > >archives, but it goes like this: > > > >EXECUTE IMMEDIATE $$ > > function body here > >$$ > >LANGUAGE plfoo; > > > >Similarly, a CREATE TEMPORARY FUNCTION could be quite handy. > > > >Cheers, > >D > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend -- David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
