Horton

Re: Anonymous code block with parameters

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Kalyanov Dmitry <kalyanov.dmitry@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-09-18T11:48:13Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2014-09-18 13:44:47 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2014-09-18 13:40 GMT+02:00 Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>:
> 
> > On 2014-09-17 22:17:22 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > 2014-09-17 22:07 GMT+02:00 Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>:
> > I fail to see why that is so much preferrable for you to passing
> > parameter to DO?
> 
> 
> > 1) You need to think about unique names for functions
> > 2) Doesn't work on HOT STANDBYs
> > 3) Causes noticeable amount of catalog bloat
> > 4) Is about a magnitude or two more expensive
> >
> 
> 1. I am not against simple DO, what doesn't substitute functions
> 
> 2. When DO have to substitute functions, then I don't see a benefits
> 
> Show me real use case please?

Did you read what I wrote above? I'm sure you can rephrase them to be
more 'use case' like yourself.

Isn't being able to do this on a standby a fundamental enough advantage?
Being significantly cheaper? Needing fewer roundtrips?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services