| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Titus von Boxberg" <ut(at)bhi-hamburg(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PL/PGSQL: Dynamic Record Introspection |
| Date: | 2005-07-19 03:10:37 |
| Message-ID: | 18889.1121742637@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
"Titus von Boxberg" <ut(at)bhi-hamburg(dot)de> writes:
> Questions:
> - could anyone who knows Oracle better than me confirm
> that with Oracle there are no RECORD variables of varying
> dynamically assigned type?
Anyone?
> - is the syntax RECORD.(identifier), RECORD.(*), RECORD.(#)
> still acceptable?
It works for me if we want to have an "NFIELDS" construct. Personally
I'm still not convinced that we need one --- what's the use-case?
> - do you agree with my approach that "identifier"
> is restricted to be a variable and cannot be an arbitrary
> expression evaluating to a string?
I'd prefer arbitrary expression, but I suppose there's no harm in doing
the simple case first and generalizing if there's demand.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-07-19 04:15:35 | Re: PL/PGSQL: Dynamic Record Introspection |
| Previous Message | Mark Wong | 2005-07-18 23:01:25 | Re: A couple of patches for PostgreSQL 64bit support |