Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 636265
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T20:29:46+00:00 2026-05-13T20:29:46+00:00

From the MSDN docs for create function : User-defined functions cannot be used to

  • 0

From the MSDN docs for create function:

User-defined functions cannot be used to perform actions that modify the database state.

My question is simply – why?

Yes, a UDF that modifies data may have potentially unwanted side-effects.
Yes, there is overhead involved if a UDF is called thousands of times.

But that is the whole point of design and testing – to ensure that such issues are ironed out before deployment. So why do DB vendors insist on imposing these artificial limitations on developers? What is the point of a language construct that can essentially only be used as a wrapper for select statements?

The reason for this question is as follows: I am writing a function to return a GUID for a certain unique integer ID. If a GUID is already allocated for that ID I simply return it; otherwise I want to generate a new GUID, store that into a table, and return the newly-generated GUID. (Yes, this sounds long-winded and possibly crazy, but when you’re sending data to another dev company who believes their design was handed down by God and cannot be improved upon, it’s easier just to smile and nod and do what they ask).

I know that I can use a stored procedure with an output parameter to achieve the same result, but then I have to declare a new variable just to hold the result of the sproc. Not only that, I then have to convert my simple select into a while loop that inserts into a temporary table, and call the sproc for every iteration of that loop.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T20:29:47+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 8:29 pm

    It’s usually best to think of the available tools as a spectrum, from Views, through UDFs, out to Stored Procedures. At the one end (Views) you have a lot of restrictions, but this means the optimizer can actually “see through” the code and make intelligent choices. At the other end (Stored Procedures), you’ve got lots of flexibility, but because you have such freedom, you lose some abilities (e.g. because you can return multiple result sets from a stored proc, you lose the ability to “compose” it as part of a larger query).

    UDFs sit in a middle ground – you can do more than you can do in a view (multiple statements, for example), but you don’t have as much flexibility as a stored proc. By giving up this freedom, it allows the outputs to be composed as part of a larger query. By not having side effects, you guarantee that, for example, it doesn’t matter in which row order the UDF is applied in. If you could have side effects, the optimizer might have to give an ordering guarantee.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I understand from the MSDN docs that the event DataReceived will not necessarily fire
From MSDN doc : A delegate is a type that safely encapsulates a method,
From MSDN Types that implement IComparable must override Equals.Types that override Equals must also
According to the msdn docs for System.Security.Cryptography.SymmetricAlgorithm Note that when using derived classes, it
The process is explained here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/d1ae6tz5%28v=VS.80%29.aspx What I don't get from that article is
From MSDN, it seems that Application.DoEvents() is available in Windows.Forms. What would be the
I copy code from MSDN It says that In Visual C++ 2005, the compiler
Reviewing the MSDN docs for SmtpClient , I noticed that the example code looks
From MSDN docs, the signature of List.max is: List.max : 'T list -> 'T
productQuery1.SelectValue<Int32>(it.ProductID); How would I know what it means here? Whole example from MSDN docs

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.