| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) |
| Cc: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: lock listing |
| Date: | 2002-07-31 19:35:07 |
| Message-ID: | 18501.1028144107@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) writes:
> There's no problem with wrapping a view over the table function -- but
> IMHO using 5 different functions when one would suffice is just ugly.
Right. The way the pg_stats functions are implemented is actually
pretty ugly; it was forced by the lack of support for functions
returning tuples in 7.2, but I'm not sure why we'd want to copy it now.
I do agree with providing a view wrapper over the function, for the
reasons Rod mentioned.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-07-31 21:18:16 | prepareable statements |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-07-31 19:23:32 | Re: lock listing |