(resent to the list, previous post was rejected)
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > *That* is a function of how Postgres set returning functions work, and not
> > specific to crosstab(). It is not easily fixed. Patches to fix that would
> > be
> > welcomed!
> >
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAFj8pRC%2BhNzpH%2B0bPRCnqNncUCGjEvpwX%2B0nbhb1F7gwjYZZNg%40mail.gmail.com#9b3fbdd968c271668049a103bfc93880
Oracle has Polymorphic Table Function but still it doesn't work
seamlessly for dynamic pivots.
This blog post illustrates why:
https://blog.sqlora.com/en/dynamic-pivot-with-polymorphic-table-function/
The "related posts" at the end are also interesting about this feature.
Even before considering more dynamic SRFs in postgres, having a
variable number of columns for a DML statement is problematic
in general.
When an SQL statement is parsed/prepared, it's not supposed to
change its output structure, unless a DDL statement intervenes.
The dynamic pivot must break this promise, since a simple INSERT or
UPDATE or DELETE in the pivoting rows may cause the number of
output columns to change across invocations of the same statement.
That would mean that PREPARE would be basically unusable or
unreliable for such statements.
I think the query parser is also not supposed to read data outside
of the catalogs to determine the output structure of a query.
This promise would also need to be broken by dynamic pivots
implemented as a single-pass DML query.
On the other hand, dynamic pivots can be done by generating the SQL
dynamically and getting at the results in a second step, or returning a
resultset embedded in a scalar (json).
Speaking of features that don't exist but might someday, ISTM that
CALL crosstab_dynamic(...) was more plausible than
SELECT * FROM crosstab_dynamic(...), since CALL
doesn't have the same contingencies as SELECT.
Best regards,
--
Daniel Vérité
PostgreSQL-powered mailer: https://www.manitou-mail.org
Twitter: @DanielVerite
