Re: returning multiple result sets from a stored procedure

On tor, 2010-09-09 at 16:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> You might care to go back and re-read some of the extensive prior
> threads about this, but to my mind the main thing that would justify
> inventing a separate PROCEDURE facility is if procedures were to
> execute outside the transaction system, so that they could start and
> stop transactions for themselves.

Given what the SQL standard says, a "procedure" certainly has to be
defined as syntactic sugar for "function returns void".  Special
transaction handling would then have to be an additional attribute of
the procedure.