Re: Problem with return type of function ??? (corrected)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Denis BUCHER <dbucherml(at)hsolutions(dot)ch>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Problem with return type of function ??? (corrected)
Date: 2009-10-22 15:51:34
Message-ID: 1268.1256226694@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Denis BUCHER <dbucherml(at)hsolutions(dot)ch> writes:
> To do this it will be a little complicated because of table
> dependencies... And it could bug again at the next DROP COLUMN... Is
> there a way to change my function (RETURN SETOF part) to specify the
> column names/types ?

No, not really. You could maybe un-drop the columns with some manual
surgery on pg_attribute, but it doesn't seem like that's going to lead
to a nice solution.

If you were really desperate you could try back-porting the patch:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2009-08/msg00068.php
but I wouldn't want to vouch for its safety, considering it hasn't
been through a beta test cycle yet.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gary Chambers 2009-10-22 17:31:11 Assigning Values to Composite Types
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-10-22 15:47:13 Re: Problem with return type of function ??? (corrected)