Hello 2008/5/10 D. Dante Lorenso <dante@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Instead of doing this: > > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION "my_custom_func" (in_value bigint) > RETURNS SETOF record AS > $body$ > ... > $body$ > LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE; > > I'd like to be able to do this: > > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION "my_custom_func" (in_value bigint) > RETURNS SETOF (col1name BIGINT, col2name TEXT, ...) AS > $body$ > ... > $body$ > LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE; > Standard syntax via ANSI SQL is CREATE FUNCTION foo(params) RETURNS TABLE(fields of output table) AS $$ ... $$ > Because this is the only function that will be returning that TYPE and I > don't want to have to create a separate type definition just for the return > results of this function. > > Maybe even more cool would be if the OUT record was already defined so that > I could simply select into that record to send our new rows: > > RETURN NEXT OUT; > > OUT.col1name := 12345; > RETURN NEXT OUT; > > SELECT 12345, 'sample' > INTO OUT.col1name, OUT.col2name; > RETURN NEXT OUT; > it's good idea - it was probably main problem of last patch in plpgsql. In this syntax is clear what is output, so RETURN NEXT statement can be without params. I am only not sure about name of default variable - maybe result is better. Regards Pavel Stehule > Just as you've allowed me to define the IN variable names without needing > the legacy 'ALIAS $1 ...' format, I'd like to name the returned record > column names and types in a simple declaration like I show above. > > Does this feature request make sense to everyone? It would make programming > set returning record functions a lot easier. > > -- Dante > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
