Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Missing array support

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 (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-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


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2003-06-29 22:56:27
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PlPython
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-06-29 22:29:18
Subject: Re: Question about array read using protocol 3.0 implementation in C#

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2003-06-30 01:01:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Missing array support
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-06-29 21:24:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Missing array support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group