Re: (SETOF) RECORD AS complex_type

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: (SETOF) RECORD AS complex_type
Date: 2006-12-27 23:40:58
Message-ID: 20061227234058.GF22284@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 06:36:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 06:22:17PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The problem with that is that "AS foo" already has a meaning, and it's
> >> not this one.
>
> > How about "AS (foo)" ?
>
> What if you want to specify an alias? This doesn't work:
>
> FROM myverylongfunctionname(...) AS alias(typename)
>
> because, again, that syntax already has a meaning.

Oops.

> You could possibly do something with a cast:
>
> FROM CAST(myfunc(...) AS typename) [ AS alias ]

Works for me.

> This is at least syntactically OK. Not sure what the implementation
> issues might be.

I'm not finding any CASTs from RECORD right offhand. Where might
those be?

Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Roman Kononov 2006-12-27 23:47:05 Re: [BUGS] BUG #2846: inconsistent and confusing handling
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-12-27 23:36:56 Re: (SETOF) RECORD AS complex_type