From: | Denis BUCHER <dbucherml(at)hsolutions(dot)ch> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Problem with return type of function ??? (corrected) |
Date: | 2009-10-22 14:38:45 |
Message-ID: | 4AE06E75.9010305@hsolutions.ch |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Hello Tom,
Tom Lane a écrit :
> Denis BUCHER <dbucherml(at)hsolutions(dot)ch> writes:
>> I have a strange problem, because it worked in a fonction for a table,
>> and now I created the same (?) function for another table and it doesn't
>> work...
>
>> The function is accepted but at runtime I get :
>
>> ERREUR: wrong record type supplied in RETURN NEXT
>> CONTEXTE : PL/pgSQL function "find_sn_live" line 26 at return next
>
> Does that table have any dropped columns? If you don't remember
> whether you ever dropped any columns, a quick look into pg_attribute
> will tell you:
> select attname from pg_attribute where attrelid = 'rma.serial_number'::regclass;
Yes !
attname
------------------------------
tableoid
cmax
xmax
cmin
xmin
ctid
sn_id
sn
no_client
no_art_bw
sn_fc_date
........pg.dropped.6........
........pg.dropped.7........
desc_fr
sn_cm_date
no_facture
no_commande
(17 lignes)
> plpgsql isn't tremendously good with rowtypes that contain dropped
> columns. I believe this particular case is fixed in CVS HEAD, but the
> patch was a bit invasive and won't get back-ported to existing releases.
> The workaround is to drop and recreate the table without any dropped
> columns.
OH, I see...
Thanks a lot, I will try this later today when nobody uses the
application...
Denis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2009-10-22 14:58:42 | Re: Problem with return type of function ??? |
Previous Message | Denis BUCHER | 2009-10-22 14:34:05 | Re: Problem with return type of function ??? |