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: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
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 

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.


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 © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group