X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E5F564AE for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 01:28:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22244-01 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 01:28:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp203.mail.sc5.yahoo.com (smtp203.mail.sc5.yahoo.com [216.136.129.93]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AB9A956497 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 01:28:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.200.87?) (fxjrlists@200.163.5.72 with plain) by smtp203.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2005 01:28:37 -0000 Message-ID: <4223CF39.4060205@yahoo.com.br> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:11:05 -0300 From: "Francisco Figueiredo Jr." User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20041022) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [JDBC] Where are we on stored procedures? References: <20050224214935.57272.qmail@web60703.mail.yahoo.com> <28071.1109284368@sss.pgh.pa.us> <421F39E0.9000706@yahoo.com.br> <421F69AD.1000803@logi-track.com> In-Reply-To: <421F69AD.1000803@logi-track.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.28 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200503/3 X-Sequence-Number: 64805 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Markus Schaber wrote: | Hi, Francisco, | | Francisco Figueiredo Jr. schrieb: | | |>In fact, I think people keep requesting me support on Npgsql for that |>because MS Sql server supports it and they are porting their code to use |>Postgresql and facing that difficult. |> |>Indeed, for (a) we could use an approach similar to Ms sql server. We |>could have a way of the procedure say if it wanted to send the rows |>affected information or not. |>And about (b) I think that it is only on trivial cases that people |>really want to use this feature :) | | | As you need to tweak the function/procedure source to implement (a), you | can also tweak the function/procedure to return the row cound and | whatever other diagnostics you need. Yeap, You are right. | | For newly implemented stored procedures, we could create a special | diagnostics result set that every procedure creates. This usually | contains some success/error information, but the procedure could add | additional rows to it. | I think this could be a very good idea. I think you could create an special tag which would say to create this special resultset or not as, I think, not every stored procedure would need it. I think this would be very nice. Thanks Markus, for feedback. - -- Regards, Francisco Figueiredo Jr. Membro Fundador do Projeto MonoBrasil - MonoBrasil Project Founder Member http://monobrasil.softwarelivre.org - ------------- "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." ~ ~ Albert Einstein -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEVAwUBQiPPOf7iFmsNzeXfAQLFYQgAkiBLkYi8lKQ6NNJ2qP48nH8PmODoe4Wp FPB7lNvo9fLw0aw5rbztcu19FtvcJBJuFBFPc2LKImpszuJ2hcD02pTGqx3UxMR8 Yz3edTijCziHg8uBTiXQV0vHZ5WeE2/sEp+ve5heanDdzAcwLiCfDPxTR1XfVYaP AJfLIHspwVkrXcEbtgwEdPX91QG/cLYjcRR/fhiaH4s8I3Hi3o9ZitQ4bkdOdosw 10+TMrgzbtXKdEOhWu9xgvdcujksjKi1xXXXSwr+L5WPi4y9iohnIi6X9j9wWlOw fr9p2lYJgfzpq71Cl8dRlW+d0pRJFUlHiNaT/Adhzwsozc459Vix8Q== =Jcuy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----