Re: RETURN QUERY in PL/PgSQL?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RETURN QUERY in PL/PgSQL?
Date: 2007-04-24 06:10:12
Message-ID: 24312.1177395012@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:
> Interesting -- I missed that patch, but it seems like a better approach.
> Are you already reviewing Pavel's patch, or is it something I could take
> a look at?

The main objection I have is that I don't think changing the definition
of pg_proc.proargmodes is a good idea --- that will break some
nontrivial amount of client-side code in order to support a distinction
that seems unimportant. IMHO anyway. Feel free to take a whack at it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marcin Waldowski 2007-04-24 06:11:36 Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298
Previous Message Neil Conway 2007-04-24 06:00:00 Re: RETURN QUERY in PL/PgSQL?