| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Missing array support |
| Date: | 2003-06-29 22:32:11 |
| Message-ID: | 3EFF68EB.5090405@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>>Included in the patch, I changed SQL language functions so that they
>>could be declared with and use polymorphic types.
>
> I'm not convinced that will work ... in particular, does the parsetree
> get fixed correctly when a SQL function is inlined?
>
I'll try it out. What's the easiest way to be sure the function get's
inlined?
In any case, it's easy enough to rip that part out of the patch -- it
just would have been a lot more painful to test without it.
Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2003-06-29 22:56:27 | Re: [HACKERS] PlPython |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-29 22:29:18 | Re: Question about array read using protocol 3.0 implementation in C# |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2003-06-30 01:01:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Missing array support |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-29 21:24:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Missing array support |