Re: proposal sql: labeled function params

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal sql: labeled function params
Date: 2008-08-15 06:32:01
Message-ID: 162867790808142332r2b8206efh12924f6467709454@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2008/8/15 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> How is this supposed to interact with argument names ?
>
> Yeah, the real problem with this proposal is that it conscripts a syntax
> that we'll probably want to use in the future for argument-name-based
> parameter matching. The proposed behavior is not nearly as useful as
> that would be.

It isn't. As Hannu showed these features should live in harmony (if we
will accept Oracle's syntax). I see as real problem new column in
pg_proc, that allow quickly chose between labeled and non labeled
functions - and then collect labels in parse time. This is way for
adding parameter info into variadic function - it's main goal of this
proposal. Without column in pg_proc it could same slowdowns like first
variadic function's implementation.

Regards
Pavel Stehule
>
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message alexander lunyov 2008-08-15 07:54:32 Re: migrate data 6.5.3 -> 8.3.1
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2008-08-15 06:22:58 Re: proposal sql: labeled function params