Error: set_valued function called in context that cannot accept a set. What is it about?

I use Postgresql 9.1, with ubuntu 12.04.

Inspired by Craig's answer to my question Concatenation of setof type or setof record I thought I would go well with using return query, setof record, and a series generator into this plpgsql function:

create or replace function compute_all_pair_by_craig(id_obj bigint)
    returns setof record as $
begin
    return query select o.id, generate_series(0,o.value) from m_obj as o;     
end;
$    language plpgsql;

During execution I get the error:

ERROR: set_valued function called in context that cannot accept a set

What is wrong ? Contrary to Craig I tell the function to return setof record.

I can achieve something that work doing exactly like Craig, i.e. by defining a type create type pair_id_value as (idx bigint, value integer) and have my plpgsql function returns a setof of pair_id_value instead of a setof record.

But even with this working solution, I still don't understand why select id, generate_series(0,13) alone will return a result in two columns... and on the contrary calling the function (returns setof pair_id_value) with return query select id, generate_series(0,my_obj.value) from my_obj will return a result in only one column which field look like this "(123123,0)" "(123123,1)" "(123123,2)" (3 rows) which are tuples obviously.

Is it a case where a temporary table must/should be created ?

The error message isn't very helpful:

regress=> SELECT * FROM  compute_all_pair_by_craig(100);
ERROR:  a column definition list is required for functions returning "record"
LINE 1: SELECT * FROM  compute_all_pair_by_craig(100);

but if you rephrase the query to call it as a proper set-returning function you'll see the real problem:

regress=> SELECT * FROM compute_all_pair_by_craig(100);
ERROR:  a column definition list is required for functions returning "record"
LINE 1: SELECT * FROM compute_all_pair_by_craig(100);

If you're using SETOF RECORD without an OUT parameter list you must specify the results in the calling statement, eg:

regress=> SELECT * FROM compute_all_pair_by_craig(100) theresult(a integer, b integer);

However, it's much better to use RETURNS TABLE or OUT parameters. With the former syntax your function would be:

create or replace function compute_all_pair_by_craig(id_obj bigint)
    returns table(a integer, b integer) as $
begin
    return query select o.id, generate_series(0,o.value) from m_obj as o;     
end;
$ language plpgsql;

This is callable in SELECT-list context and can be used without creating a type explicitly or specifying the result structure at the call site.

As for the second half of the question, what's happening is that the 1st case specifies two separate columns in a SELECT-list, wheras the second returns a single composite. It's actually not to do with how you're returning the result, but how you're invoking the function. If we create the sample function:

CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION twocols() RETURNS TABLE(a integer, b integer) 
AS $ SELECT x, x FROM generate_series(1,5) x; $ LANGUAGE sql;

You'll see the difference in the two ways to call a set-returning function - in the SELECT list, a PostgreSQL specific non-standard extension with quirky behaviour:

regress=> SELECT twocols();
 twocols 
---------
 (1,1)
 (2,2)
 (3,3)
 (4,4)
 (5,5)
(5 rows)

or as a table in the more standard way:

regress=> SELECT * FROM twocols();
 a | b 
---+---
 1 | 1
 2 | 2
 3 | 3
 4 | 4
 5 | 5
(5 rows)

StackExchange Database Administrators Q#37571, answer score: 7