Re: Need help with clarification on stored procedure support in PostGreSQL database

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, Guyren Howe <guyren@gmail.com>, raf <raf@raf.org>, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>, "Bysani, Ram" <rbysani@informatica.com>, "pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-03-09T23:50:43Z
Lists: pgsql-general
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:21 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Instead of "The difference" or "One difference" I would suggest:
>>> "However, a procedure does not return a value, so there is no return type
>>> declaration; though a procedure can declare INOUT (but not plain OUT)
>>> parameters."

>> Not sure if that's an improvement.

> The "however" part is probably a wash; I just dislike seeing a count
> started and not having an ending and thus being left in a state of "what
> didn't they include that's important".

The rest of the paragraph is what's important enough to include here.

I very strongly dislike the existing "The difference ..." wording,
because it implies that that's the only difference, which is immediately
belied by the rest.  "However" isn't a lot better.  Would it be better
to turn the para into a bulleted list, which we could introduce with
"The key differences are:" ?

			regards, tom lane



Commits

  1. Doc: improve introductory information about procedures.

  2. Support for OUT parameters in procedures