96

Am very new in Database development so I have some doubts regarding my following example:

Function f1() - language sql

 create or replace function f1(istr  varchar)
 returns text as $$ 
 select 'hello! '::varchar || istr;
 $$ language sql;

Function f2() - language plpgsql

 create  or replace function f2(istr  varchar)
 returns text as $$ 
 begin select 'hello! '::varchar || istr; end;
 $$ language plpgsql;
  • Both functions can be called like select f1('world') or select f2('world').

  • If I call select f1('world') the output will be:

     `hello! world`
    
  • And output for select f2('world'):

    ERROR: query has no destination for result data HINT: If you want to discard the results of a SELECT, use PERFORM instead. CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function f11(character varying) line 2 at SQL statement ********** Error **********

  • I wish to know the difference and in which situations I should use language sql or language plpgsql.

Any useful link or answers regarding functions will much appreciated.

alinsoar
  • 15,386
  • 4
  • 57
  • 74
  • 8
    _any usefull link or answers regarding functions will much appreciated_ Who would ever think about the manual? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/server-programming.html – Clodoaldo Neto Jul 15 '14 at 10:20
  • 2
    @ClodoaldoNeto _someone may lazy to find out or not able to find out the correct solutions...!!_ –  Jul 15 '14 at 10:23
  • 2
    @keet You may want to read this chapter of the manual: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql.html It contains full description of PL/pgSQL language with examples. – Ihor Romanchenko Jul 15 '14 at 10:29
  • 1
    @ClodoaldoNeto PostgreSQL-Guide was reviewd many times, is a good text; but there are no "open [stakeholder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_engagement) curation" and no [crowdsourcing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdsourcing) mechanism to enhance it. So: PostgreSQL is bad (!) for many users and many kinds of use. – Peter Krauss Mar 16 '16 at 11:06

3 Answers3

136

SQL functions

... are the better choice:

  • For simple scalar queries. Not much to plan, better save any overhead.

  • For single (or very few) calls per session. Nothing to gain from plan caching via prepared statements that PL/pgSQL has to offer. See below.

  • If they are typically called in the context of bigger queries and are simple enough to be inlined.

  • For lack of experience with any procedural language like PL/pgSQL. Many know SQL well and that's about all you need for SQL functions. Few can say the same about PL/pgSQL. (Though it's rather simple.)

  • A bit shorter code. No block overhead.

PL/pgSQL functions

... are the better choice:

  • When you need any procedural elements or variables that are not available in SQL functions, obviously.

  • For any kind of dynamic SQL, where you build and EXECUTE statements dynamically. Special care is needed to avoid SQL injection. More details:

  • When you have computations that can be reused in several places and a CTE can't be stretched for the purpose. In an SQL function you don't have variables and would be forced to compute repeatedly or write to a table. This related answer on dba.SE has side-by-side code examples for solving the same problem using an SQL function / a plpgsql function / a query with CTEs:

Assignments are somewhat more expensive than in other procedural languages. Adapt a programming style that doesn't use more assignments than necessary.

Also consider:


To actually return from a PL/pgSQL function, you could write:

CREATE FUNCTION f2(istr varchar)
  RETURNS text AS
$func$
BEGIN
   RETURN 'hello! ';  -- defaults to type text anyway
END
$func$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;

There are other ways:

Erwin Brandstetter
  • 605,456
  • 145
  • 1,078
  • 1,228
  • Well said; I forgot to mention dynamic SQL, too. – Craig Ringer Jul 16 '14 at 04:00
  • Thanks. I guess there is one difference not mentioned in your reply. Is it correct that a SQL function can't contain any command which alter the system catalog, such as `CREATE TABLE`, while a PL/pgSQL function can? What is the reason? See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51004980/what-is-the-order-between-parsing-and-execution-of-pl-pgsql-functions –  Jun 25 '18 at 04:16
  • @Ben: Not exactly. SQL functions *can* contain DDL commands. You just need to be aware of implications. And some combinations of commands don't work. I added an answer over there. – Erwin Brandstetter Jun 26 '18 at 02:12
23

PL/PgSQL is a PostgreSQL-specific procedural language based on SQL. It has loops, variables, error/exception handling, etc. Not all SQL is valid PL/PgSQL - as you discovered, for example, you can't use SELECT without INTO or RETURN QUERY. PL/PgSQL may also be used in DO blocks for one-shot procedures.

sql functions can only use pure SQL, but they're often more efficient and they're simpler to write because you don't need a BEGIN ... END; block, etc. SQL functions may be inlined, which is not true for PL/PgSQL.

People often use PL/PgSQL where plain SQL would be sufficient, because they're used to thinking procedurally. In most cases when you think you need PL/PgSQL you probably actually don't. Recursive CTEs, lateral queries, etc generally meet most needs.

For more info ... see the manual.

Craig Ringer
  • 307,061
  • 76
  • 688
  • 778
  • 2
    True, set based solutions are typically superior. But that's no final verdict in whether to use an SQL or a PL/pgSQL function. Newcomers are sometimes using plpgsql for the wrong reasons. – Erwin Brandstetter Jul 16 '14 at 03:10
1

just make the select query you wrote inside the function as the returned value:

 create  or replace function f2(istr  varchar)
 returns text as $$ 
 begin return(select 'hello! '::varchar || istr); end;
 $$ language plpgsql;
ZORRO_BLANCO
  • 849
  • 13
  • 25
  • There is no need for the SELECT statement if this context. RETURN 'hello! '::varchar || istr; is quite enough. The pure SQL version (without begin... return ... end...) is likely to be much more efficient anyway. – scand1sk Feb 07 '22 at 21:50