| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1 |
| Date: | 2004-09-24 14:25:10 |
| Message-ID: | 21398.1096035910@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 04:12, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Well, see my thoughts above on differentiating SPs from Functions. I
>> certainly don't think we should be using the same table.
> Using a different system catalog strikes me as total overkill, and a
> surefire way to duplicate a lot of code.
I think that choice will be driven by one thing and one thing only: do
procedures and functions have the same primary key? Which boils down to
whether they have the same semantics about overloaded function names
and resolution of ambiguous parameter types. Personally I think I'd
prefer that they did, but plenty of people have indicated they'd rather
have other features (like defaultable parameters).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-09-24 14:37:47 | PostgreSQL 8.0 beta3 on Monday |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-09-24 14:12:59 | Re: Use of zlib |