> I've been working on a function which returns a setof a composite type.
> Everytime I've changed the structure of the returning setof, I've had to
> change the type accordingly, which current means doing a drop type ...
> cascade down to the function. We should allow one of the following:
Why not go all the way and work out a way to define an SRF return type as a
part of the function? e.g.
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION some_srf ( param1 int, param2 text )
RETURNS some_srf ( col1 int, col2 numeric ) AS ....
Then the "replace" function would automatically rebuild the type.
PostgreSQL @ Sun
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2006-05-24 01:21:12|
|Subject: Re: Why is CVS server so slow?|
|Previous:||From: John Jawed||Date: 2006-05-24 00:30:17|
|Subject: Improving ALTER TYPE support|