From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name |
Date: | 2011-04-14 18:37:47 |
Message-ID: | m2zknsy8zo.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> rhaas=# CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION developer_lookup(id integer)
> RETURNS text AS $$SELECT name FROM developer WHERE id = $1$$ LANGUAGE
> sql STABLE;
>
> Now, when this person attempts to recreate this function on a
> hypothetical version of PostgreSQL that thinks "id" is ambiguous, it
> doesn't work.
Unless we make it so that no such version ever exists. Meaning that the
code works fine as is or using WHERE id = developer_lookup.id. AS id
can't ever be the parameter in this case, you're just fine.
Bearing in mind that $1 etc shortcuts still are available, I don't
really see this qualification of parameter names with function names so
big a problem that we should find a way to avoid it and risk breaking
compatibility.
Don't forget that any ambiguity here will mean *huge* migration costs.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-04-14 18:40:52 | Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-04-14 18:37:26 | Re: [HACKERS] Uppercase SGML entity declarations |